An evening panorama of Alhambra taken from the classic viewpoint Mirador de San Nicolás with very good light. It shows the Alhambra in its entirety from the Generalife to the left to the Alcazaba at the right.
Support as nominator – GamerPro64 02:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
I guess I'll jump in first. It has a somewhat unusual pattern - my instinct says half-toning, but it's actually not quite right for halftoning, so it may be one of the obscurer photographic printing techniques. In any case, it's decent resolution despite whatever that is; we've certainly had things where the film grain made the effective resolution substantially less. It does appear to be out of copyright, which, frankly, seems to be a major problem with photographs of Cocteau. I'm happy enough Supporting. Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:46, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Support Valuable portrait with good expression and good technical quality. -- Slaunger (talk) 16:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Support per Adam. Reminds me of that Frenchman we had a few months ago... forget his name. Same pattern. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Support also per Adam. Startling image and well shot overall. Jusdafax 19:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
There was a nomination of this a while ago, but I've looked up Frink, and he appears to be an American photographer working for the army at the time, so the issues from that nomination can safely be ignored. I think it's a fine restoration, probably as good as I could do, and thus certainly worth a nomination.
Support Stunning and valuable portrait. Good restoration. When comparing with the original I am impressed how even quite large damages have been repaired. -- Slaunger (talk) 16:43, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Support - My copyright concerns appear to have been addressed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Support This is an excellent portrait Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Support - Good image of interesting character. SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Genuine Series 1880 $100 Legal Tender Note. (For comparison purposes only, not part of the nomination.)
High quality image, high EV. Very high quality example of Ninger’s hand-drawn counterfeit banknotes. Possession of such “banknotes” is illegal, regardless of whether they are in circulation or not. Select U.S. federal agencies are exempt (including the Smithsonian).
Sorry, I should have mentioned- reverse is not shown because the note was mounted on card (there is nothing to see on the reverse).--Godot13 (talk) 15:46, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
It would be useful to include the obverse of the genuine bill in the article, especially given that Godot scanned both at the same resolution making direct comparison quite easy (currently there is a scan of it with the reverse included available). 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree. I was trying to find an image of a note in the same basic condition, but barring that, i'll put something in the article today...-Godot13 (talk) 20:23, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Genuine note added to the article and inserted above. Matched for seal type and signature combination. NOT part of the nomination.--Godot13 (talk) 05:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Much improved. Kudos for going the extra mile in matching the seal and signature. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Support I have not been commenting on any of the other bank note images but this one intrigued me --Muhammad(talk) 05:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Drajay1976 (talk) 12:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment. Seems an awful lot of sky. Also, it's a shame that the picture is dominated by that ugly white modern thing and associated clutter. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose It is a still image less than 1500 pixels high - a no go as far as I understand the criteria. Moreover, the composition is unconvincing. Way to much space is used on sky with no information. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2014 at 20:14:33 (UTC)
Original – Young Bride (“Laura”)
An interesting Italian bridal portrait from the sixteenth century. According to art historian Norbert Schneider's book The Art of the Portrait, 2002, capter. Giorgione: Portrait of a Young Lady ("Laura"): ... it is only from the prudish perspective of the nineteenth or early twentieth century that the baring of a breast would be viewed as debauched or meretricious. In the sixteenth century, nudity did not provoke disapproval, but was shown publicly and uninhibitedly. This painting, too, was publicly shown, probably by a proud noble who wished to celebrate his bride's attractiveness - ... - as well as her virtue and chastity. The laurel was considered a symbol of virtue... The veil wound about her shoulders and upper body is a bridal veil, and her bared right breast alludes to the proverbial chastity of the Amazons...
Support as nominator – Drajay1976 (talk) 04:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose I find the light is dull on the lighthouse and I do not fancy the rather strong perpective distortions caused by being so close to the subject (I am not asking to make a post-processing "correction", it would not look right). Simply not eye-catching enough for me for such a relatively easy to photograph subject. Sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose unsharp, tilted and unfavorable light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2014 at 14:29:49 (UTC)
Original – Inside view of the hall which serves as a museum.
Edit 1 Attempted to rectify parallax errors
One of the most taxing images I have taken. I was shooting handheld and the inside light was not ideal. Add to that the people moving around, and the almost 180 degree view, led to some frustrating moments and tired hands. I'll admit the image is probably not perfect AKA Diliff standard ;), but the view and the fact that we have few images from Iran are all positive points IMO.
Weak support original, support alt - This is an absolutely beautiful image, and I understand your pain taking it. However, there are several parallax errors (mostly quite minor) which make me unable to give a full support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Much better. There's still one small one, but it's barely visible. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment. The walls all appear to be slightly warped and off true. Is that an artefact of the photography process, or are they really like that? I gather it is a very old building, so maybe they are ... 184.108.40.206 (talk) 01:50, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I suspect that it's a matter of using the cylindrical perspective. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
My opinion is that photos that distort their subject in a misleading way are not suitable as encyclopedic content. I don't know what it is with these stitched-together post-processed images -- whether the software is not up to the job, or whether it is misused -- but in so many of them the end result just looks wrong to the eye. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
When it comes to such a wide field of view, it is impossible to avoid distortions. One has to choose between a small non-distorted area which may not give the full picture or a wider view with the expected distortions --Muhammad(talk) 21:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I think it might be helpful to at least state what projection was used. Samsara (FA • FP) 23:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree. The cylindrical projection was used and I have added that to the image description. --Muhammad(talk) 23:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Support both I have been there a couple of years ago. You need to be there to feel the architecture and wonderful paintings. Much EV and HQ.Alborzagros (talk) 14:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I would support the ALT as the image is very pretty (which is my FP criterion), but were there identical twins in the same clothes or did the same person get in two of the stitched images? (also what has the woman standing in front of the desk told the woman sitting behind it? Bad news by the look of it.) Belle (talk) 02:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Can't say I see it. Could you tag that on Commons? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
The woman receiving bad news? The identical twins/doubles are at the rear of the hall; girl(s) with white cap, white top, jeans, mules, either side of the guy with the black bag. I don't know how to tag anything on Commons (what a dimbo). Belle (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Not a dimbo, just not used to that feature. Under the image is an "add a note" button, which you can click, then click and drag on the image to create a box. This lets you insert a note regarding what is in that box or an issue you've spotted. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment: I just noticed that the image isn't perfectly symmetrical. (Camera's slightly off-centre to the right.) Any reason in particular? --Paul_012 (talk) 14:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Edit 1 — Perfect and high quality image from a very important place. -- Bkouhi (talk) 12:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Pine✉ 01:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment - Wouldn't this work better straightened? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
You'd have to do a lot of cloning to keep both the lower left corner boat and flame/plume fully within the frame. Not sure we should consider this acceptable, given the other perspective mentioned below. Samsara (FA • FP) 16:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Didn't really take all that much.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd have gone with some cloning, some cropping. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Inserted as alt. Thanks. --Pine✉ 17:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Inserted a straightened, cropped and cloned alternative to the original.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
The lower left hand corner has some obvious cloning issues to clean up, but at the moment I am unable to override the file at commons. Just got a new account there to be inline with my account name here. it's probably just an edit count or upload issue that straightens out after some time, edits and uploads.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2014 at 01:09:58 (UTC)
Original – Construction of the Monroe Street Bridge, Spokane, Washington. August 3, 1911.
High historic and encyclopedic value; the image was taken in 1911 of what would become the largest concrete deck arch bridge in the US and third longest in the world. Quality of the image, high resolution (3617 × 735 = 2,658,495) and very clean for a pic over 100 years old.
Oppose A version 780 pixels high is available (the one with the black square around it), and, while the photo can't be redone, the scan could be. Adam Cuerden(talk) 22:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I looked at that, despite my slow connection, and I'm not too sure the extra 50 pixels is worth the effort, or that it would be an extra 50 pixels after restoration work. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:43, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
In all honesty, I think that settling is often a good way to prevent us from ever getting a better copy. People won't go the extra mile if we're so ready to accept "good enough". Adam Cuerden(talk) 01:09, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
If we were talking, say, 1250px I'd be all for it. But it's 50px. Even that would technically be "good enough" and well under the current minimum. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't think we should settle for either. The LoC do offer to make higher-resolution scans. They might charge for it, but I don't think "I'm not willing to pay" is a particularly good defense. Adam Cuerden(talk) 08:07, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I think Fae is doing work with the LOC, actually. If that's still true, maybe we won't have to pay. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
support since I was asked to comment, I am inclined to side with Crisco's view - - Muhammad(talk) 02:55, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Support - Very good shot. I did a quick edit to remove a red tinge or whatever that was at the right side of the image (as well as a few specks on the floor etc.). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:52, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2014 at 19:12:16 (UTC)
Original – Dendrogramma enigmatica
Image meets size and technical criteria and has high encyclopedic value. We are unlikely to get any better photos of the species since no one appears to have found any more of them. The image comes from the original open access paper so is pretty much the definitive image at this point. I'd like to get it to featured status so we have something to run on the main page for Open Access Week.
Support Wow, I'm so thankful that open access papers exist. And more thankful that it's been confirmed that this image is indeed in public domain. I would say it's a perfect image of this tiny bizarre creature. Mattximus (talk) 20:31, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment - There's at least one hot pixel. Also, the specimen appears a little noisy, as if this was shot at a high ISO. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Support It's not perfect but the rarity makes me support. In case they are found and photographed again, a replacement can be done --Muhammad(talk) 05:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Weak support - What the hey, it is a rare image, and I've taken care of the hot pixel. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Very high EV, good diagram labeling, and high resolution. Kaldari (talk) 06:32, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Support per Muhammad Mahdi Karim. Adam Cuerden(talk) 07:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2014 at 05:36:23 (UTC)
Original – Dome of the tomb of Fatimah Masumah in Qum
I'd like to think it's a different kind of image to what is usually seen here. We have few Persian images and I think this is one of the finest in terms of quality. Gives a nice view of what an Islamic dome looks like.
Support - Very nice image, both EV and artistic at the same time.--Godot13 (talk) 03:16, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Weak support--Worried by blown lights which is unavoidable..The herald 08:37, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Unavoidable and fixing it will just make it look unnatural, kinda like the glow in the eyes --Muhammad(talk) 13:33, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Support nice picture. Nikhil (talk) 02:18, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Support - Great picture. Good lighting and color with a nice view of the façade and minaret. Foreground gives the picture a nice equilibrium.G755648 (talk) 03:53, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose – Apart from the technical issue with the reflection, I don't think the composition with the minaret half behind the dome is particularly good. Also, the image doesn't have the most encyclopedic value for Fatima Masumeh Shrine, which is a large building with four minarets and a colorful facade. – Editør (talk) 12:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Great image, but I'm wondering if it should replace the lead image? This one is superior IMO. Mattximus (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Support Great wide shot by DXR! --CarGT 04:12, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Support I don't want to even think about the number of people DXR had to shoot to get a human and vehicle-free photo here, but at least their grieving families can be consoled by the excellence of the resulting image. Nick-D (talk) 02:19, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Hôtel des Invalides, North View, Paris 7e 140402 1.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 12:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't think that being an "artist's impression/conception" is on it's own grounds for opposing this. We're never going to have an actual image of our galaxy. There will always be the need to draw/render it. For it to have value it needs to be drawn for credible, recent and accepted information. These images do exist. I'd say the best one is this which does all of the above, and comes from a reputable source. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I could probably get behind that annotated version, as it serves as a diagram and not just "this is the Milky Way". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Support Alt 1 -- Happy to support that. Are images of our Galaxy that scarce? I understand that necessarily they are either images of the Milky Way or synthesis. Away most of today but I'll look through the APOD archives when I get back and if I see anything as good as Alt comment here. Cheers. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 11:25, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeh, sure I'll try through APOD. You'll get more images (from outside) till either you take them from outside (may be some Voyager 3 or like that) or some aliens may take a selfie with ours...:-) The herald 11:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Or we can call a drawing a drawing, mark it as a diagram, and nominate that. Should work much better. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2014 at 15:50:25 (UTC)
Original – The Gleaners, an oil painting by Jean-François Millet completed in 1857 which depicts three peasant women gleaning a field of stray grains of wheat after the harvest. It has been called one of Millet's best known works.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2014 at 22:33:45 (UTC)
Original – On the balcony are depicted to the left is Berthe Morisot, who became in 1874 the wife of Manet's brother, Eugène. In the centre is the painter Jean Baptiste Antoine Guillemet. On the right is violinist Fanny Claus.
It is an important and well known painting made 1868 by Édouard Manet. It was one of the paintings that together with Manet's The Luncheon on the Grass (Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe), painted 1863 marked the beginning of the impressionism. It is considered inovative and iconic and it went against the conventions. When exhibited at the Paris Salon of 1869, it was considered unusual. It depicts among others  The contrast of colors with the background completely black, the white faces and clothes, the blue tie of the man, and the green railings bold green drew much attention, at the time when the public was used to the dull academic paintings and their style.
Support and as a minature it is well made, it is very difficult painting so well on a tiny size like this. Hafspajen (talk) 09:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Support - Extraordinary quality given the size.--Godot13 (talk) 06:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment The cropping of the frame is a bit strange; it's not cropped for the most part so you can see the background at the rounding of the corners but is cropped inside the edge of the frame as it approaches the top righthand corner and bottom lefthand corner. I don't think it should be enough to disqualify it, but if the frame isn't important enough to show completely it might be better not to show it at all ([sound of framers weeping] Ignore them, it's their own fault, they should have checked the frame was square). Belle (talk) 11:25, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2014 at 11:48:56 (UTC)
Original – The models are Dolly (left, aged 11) and Polly (right, aged 7), the daughters of Sargent's friend illustrator Fred Barnard; they were selected because of the blonde colour of their hair.
A good quality, eye catching, high resolution image painted in 1885 when the artist John Singer Sargent was attempting move away from the scandal he caused the previous year with his Portrait of Madame X. Only a few moments each day gave the lighting effect he wanted to capture of the purple tinge of evening light.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2014 at 19:31:44 (UTC)
Original – The Fog Warning is one of the best among his many great works, a dramatic moment when the fisherman is fighting to get back to the boat before caught in the fog. The psychological drama of a fisherman in danger of getting lost at sea is depicted in this painting. The fisherman who was out fishing for halibut is surprised out at sea by the fog. He has grabbed the oars and he is on his way towards the ship, to escape from being fogbound. The painting is more disturbing than Homers previous calm sunny country life scenes.
Winslow Homer (1836 – 1910) was an original and interesting American painter, best known for his paintings with marine subjects. He is considered one of the foremost painters in 19th-century America and a preeminent figure in American art.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2014 at 00:28:33 (UTC)
Original – Photograph shows half-length portrait of two girls wearing banners with slogan "ABOLISH CH[ILD] SLAVERY!!" in English and Yiddish ("(ני)דער מיט (קינד)ער שקלאפער(ײ)", "Nider mit Kinder Schklawerii"), one carrying American flag; spectators stand nearby. Probably taken during May 1, 1909 labor parade in New York City.
Iconic. Multiply linked in English Wikipedia. Featured Turkish and Hebrew Wikipedias.
Oppose - It does look like an important picture. But I can't help but get distracted by the flare at the top right corner. Pretty much ruins its for me. GamerPro64 15:53, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Overexposed and shallow depth of field. Flare in top right corner. Does not really provide much information about a specific topic, as such has limit encyclopedic value. Chillum 18:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Per GamerPro64 and Chillum. 00:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - we are aiming for a complete collection ... Hafspajen (talk) 11:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Support I really love the way money looks as art sometimes!--Mark Miller (talk) 21:26, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Philippine money during the Japanese occupation is a rare find nowadays, each one costing tens of thousands of pesos today. To see a complete set for the benefit of millions of Filipino readers is worthy of being featured by Wikipedia. Arius1998 (talk) 04:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:PHI-102b-Japanese Government (Philippines)-1 Centavo (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-103b-Japanese Government (Philippines)-5 Centavos (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-104b-Japanese Government (Philippines)-10 Centavos (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-105b-Japanese Government (Philippines)-50 Centavos (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-106-Japanese Government (Philippines)-1 Peso (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-107A-Japanese Government (Philippines)-5 Pesos (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-108-Japanese Government (Philippines)-10 Pesos (1942).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-109-Japanese Government (Philippines)-1 Peso (1943).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-110-Japanese Government (Philippines)-5 Pesos (1943).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-111-Japanese Government (Philippines)-10 Pesos (1943).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-112-Japanese Government (Philippines)-100 Pesos (1944).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-114-Japanese Government (Philippines)-500 Pesos (1944).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:PHI-115-Japanese Government (Philippines)-1000 Pesos (1945).jpgArmbrustHomunculus 12:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Original – Fez trial gameplay, demonstrating the rotation mechanic and game objectives
A rare free use release of extended gameplay from a high-profile video game. It illustrates the notoriously-difficult-to-describe rotation mechanic from the game, and has potential to illustrate many other gameplay concept articles if it were to be split into smaller clips. This video is the best release of unedited gameplay that I have seen in my time with the project.
Support: Very illustrative of Fez's gameplay, graphical style and music. Great resolution, too. Pacing is excellent aside from a small drag when Gomez falls in the water around 3 minutes in. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Support. Having played this game myself, I agree that it's almost impossible to explain the rotation mechanics without an actual gameplay example. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 00:11, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support --Let it go..The herald 07:42, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2014 at 16:13:31 (UTC)
Original – Mount Greylock State Reservation in Autumn (Greylock summit on the far right)
It is the only image in Wikimedia to offer a complete view of the eponymous reservation, it is of high technical quality, and it is taken from a difficult-to-hike-to destination that required lugging 40lbs of camera gear uphill 6 miles through the woods.
Comment Seems titled clockwise (see the tower at the far right in pic) Nikhil (talk) 02:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment Gorgeous. Think the tilted tower is maybe a result of barrel distortion from the panoramic lens? Six faint or very faint circular patches in the sky area, and that dark blur that looks like a UFO.
Comment from nominator Hey thanks for the feedback everyone. I think both the dark artifacts and the distortion mentioned above are results of the composite process as I had to stitch this from a few different frames on my 35mm. I am going back there this weekend to try with a wider lens. I will work hard and hopefully back with a better picture! ----------Protophobic (talk) 13:40, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Think we're mainly just waiting on replies on this one. Adam Cuerden(talk) 01:16, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2014 at 17:56:08 (UTC)
Original – 1 month old Labrador Retriever
Picture with good quality and EV. Composition is also fine. Only thing is tail is not in focus and I think, that is not seriously effecting the photograph. No other pictures are featured in this particular article.
Everything except the dog's face is out of focus... 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment - very cute. Hafspajen (talk) 16:56, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose. Puppies are pretty heavily photographed... I'd want to see something pretty special to support at FPC. This is a very good picture, but I wouldn't call it a great picture. J Milburn (talk) 16:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment -wish they were...heavily photographed. Once I went through 500 pictures to find acceptable ones for the article about them - so much crap that it is incredible. Anyone who can make good dog photos are encouraged. Hafspajen (talk) 23:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose A touch underexposed. May also need higher dynamic range to bring shadows into play. Samsara (FA • FP) 11:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 14:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Eye-catching and important parts seem to be in focus. Brandmeistertalk 17:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - I'd have preferred to have the whole reptile in focus, but considering how rare it is to have good snake shots here, and the fact that the face is absolutely sharp, this is good enough for me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:47, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2014 at 10:33:13 (UTC)
Original – Piercing gaze, pretty parka. This is actually the ALT2 image from the last nom, but the original and ALT1 can be added if you want.
This was nominated before some time ago by Crisco 1492, but didn't get much of a shot. All the previous reasons for making it FP still apply and she has a lovely parka which wasn't mentioned in the last nomination (I'm sure WikiProject Parka members could sweep this through FPC if only we were allowed to canvass them). My two previous FP nominations have sailed through with plenty of support and no opposition, so don't make me cry by rejecting this one (also think of poor Crisco 1492 and his sad puppy eyes and how bad he will feel if it gets rejected twice).
Comment - On my monitor and to my untrained eye, the background on some of the images is striped at thumbnail size, though this is not apparent when looking at a larger version. This particularly applies to Tyler, Polk, Lincoln, McKinley and Roosevelt, but to a lesser extent some of the others. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:59, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Cwmhiraeth- I've enlarged and re-spaced the thumbnail images to reduce the effect somewhat. However (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong), thumbnail images are a means to open the files themselves and aren't part of evaluating a nomination.--Godot13 (talk) 07:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
My thumbnails aren't showing up like that, oddly enough. Usually the striping effect is from halftoning or similar printing processes, though I don't think I've ever seen engravings get striped. What browser are you on? That might affect it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
That makes sense. I believe that's an artefact of MediaWiki's downsampling of JPEGs, rather than something wrong with the file itself (any engraving has the possibility of creating a moire pattern). Since FPs are judged according to full size only, that's fortunately not too big of an issue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Moiré patterns seem a good explanation for the phenomenon. Happy to support this nomination. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 15:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Spent some time looking at Arthur at full size, trying to puzzle out exactly how the engraver(s) went about their work- for example the edge of his collar is roughly drawn, with maybe three lines, which contrasts oddly with the precision of the shading lines. yes, I have got a life Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Superb quality, historically invaluable, and an asset to Wikipedia as an Encyclopedia. -- (Aside comment: Engravers almost always use a model for their engravings. For example, the engraving here of Washington was modeled after a painting by Gilbert Stuart. This is the same portrait used for the engraving on the one dollar bill and on a number of postage stamps. (Example). It would be nice to add such notes in the file summaries of these images in the future, per available information.) -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:56, 4 October 2014 (UTC).
Thanks Gwillhickers, definitely on my list of things to do. I started here for the vignettes. Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 03:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
The VG project has recently taken to using JPGs, but the PNGs were standard up through early 2013 AFAIK. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Support though I think this should be put in the article on the system too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:32, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Clear image and a good display of the subject (therefore good for articles) - 09:30, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Though it's a little on the small side for my taste - but, then, the console's fairly rare. Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment Something unhappy about the way that the edges of that top plate are rendered - any chance of lighting/exposing it so those don't slink away into darkness? Samsara (FA • FP) 11:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Hit refresh Crisco 1492. I have overridden the main image so that it can be in all the articles without having to change every one of them to put in the new version. I created the other version for the FPN as to be able to show both. Since the OP decided to re-nominate the corrected version, I went ahead and did the override and put the other up for deletion because it is now redundant.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Alright, I've got it. Support - Solid image. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:19, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - striking image. The red reflection is very interesting. Hafspajen (talk) 22:18, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Support very good EV! CarGT 01:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - intense...--Godot13 (talk) 01:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling unit on fire 2010.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 19:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2014 at 22:07:13 (UTC)
Original – The picture depicts the intimate joy of a child looking up into his father face and the father looking serene, slightly smiling back at him. An enigmatic smile that is almost just can be guessed, looking at the eyes...
Guido Reni was an Italian painter of high-Baroque style, highly estimated while he lived, one of the important painters in the art history. This picture is one of the most intimate and warm depictions of a father figure, a person who has a key role in a child's life. Joseph, a typical father figure, is often lost and forgotten in art history. There are plenty of pictures of the Madonna and Child, but not so many made of Joseph and Child. This one is particulary nice, kept together by the warm colors and a good composition, using Joseph cloak as a frame. It could depict any child and father, the feelings are universal.
Support — Interesting for rarity of subject matter, as Hafs says, and also for its depiction of Joseph as an old man, in keeping with a certain theological tradition (which later fell out of favor, if I'm not mistaken). Sca (talk) 15:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Original image is 3,123 × 4,888 pixels, high technical standard, Is among Wikipedia's best work and the main infobox image of article Tiger, Has a free license, helps readers to understand Tiger article, facts are supported by sources.
Support as nominator – ter 11:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose this version. Insane level of JPG artefacting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:45, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492: Can you please clarify? There are three versions available of this image, will reverting to an older version can fix the problem? Thanks, (from public cyber) 11:53, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The one which was current at the time of my post. The one which is now current is a bit better, but I'm still not sure it's featured quality. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492: Please reconsider. I have checked the criteria before nominating it. And I didn't found anything of a trouble. And honestly there are not many Bengal tiger's picture exist here of even this quality. Can you please clarify your !vote with reference to the criteria? (from public cyber) 13:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose, Great shot, and rare and surely a good asset for the article in all possible ways. However to be a Featured picture, it is not centered. The animal is to the left. Hafspajen (talk) 13:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Please try to find other pictures to us, you are on the right way. You can always ask Crisco for example if you are not sure about it, I do that often. In this way you can be more sure about it. If I am in doubt (and that happens often) I always ask others before nominate a picture, as a second oppinion, you know. You have a talent in finding great shots, don't give up! This is a striking picture too, certainly. Hafspajen (talk) 14:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Hafspajen. This is a totally different field and I should admit that this was my first time here (I don't really work with files). I will go ahead and find some more pics and before nominating them I will ask you and Crisco. Thanks again, it was good experience for me. And I think this discussion can be closed speedily per WP:SNOW. (from public cyber) 15:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2014 at 02:55:39 (UTC)
Original – Beauty Revealed, a self-portrait by Sarah Goodridge completed in 1828, when she was 40 years old. It was gifted to Daniel Webster, and his family hold that the two were engaged (though he ended up marrying a wealthier woman).
A very interesting self-portrait. Very personal, powerful. Yes, this may also require an RFC before going on the main page, but I think we can all recognize that this is a good digitization of the miniature (only 6.7 cm × 8 cm (2.6 in × 3.1 in)). Watercolor on ivory, which has to be one of the more unique mediums I've seen.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2014 at 13:22:35 (UTC)
Original – A Post-Impressionist Still life by a notable artist, well done, with powerful colours and lines.
Samuel Peploe (1871 – 1935) - was a a Scottish Post-Impressionist painter, noted for his still life works and for being one of the group of four painters that became known as the Scottish Colourists. Peploe's 1905 painting Still Life with Coffee Pot, sold on 26 May 2011 at Christie's in London for £937,250, is one of the most expensive Scottish painting sold at auction. The previous record for a work by Peploe was £623,650 for Tulips, sold in 2010.
Varnish was not used by the impressionist, they thought it was bad style old fashioned, dark and just stupidity. Some had problems later with deteriorating colurs because of that. Hafspajen (talk) 14:04, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
But nothing has fallen of from this one, this is good quality. Hafspajen (talk) 21:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support: Another very good instructive narrative, Hafs. Notable and of good quality. Fylbecatuloustalk 01:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Support: A nice reproduction of notable art. Not my favourite art by the Colourists, but... Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:40, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Samuel Peploe - Still life- apples and jar - Google Art Project.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 13:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2014 at 15:37:54 (UTC)
Original – A nearly full Moon sets as the space shuttle Discovery sits atop Launch pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, in the early morning hours of Wednesday, March 11, 2009.
Alt.1 – The Discovery space shuttle lifting off on the STS-119 mission from Launch Pad 39A at NASA's Kennedy Space Center.
Support any or all as nominator – The herald 15:37, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose. Not a useful nomination. These are not a coherent set- each adds something different to the article and they really should be judged separately. We don't nominate FAs or FLs by just throwing as many articles/lists at the nomination process as possible, so we shouldn't do the same thing with FPs. J Milburn (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment It is not a set, there are ALTs. Hafspajen (talk) 18:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't think ALTs work that way. GamerPro64 21:57, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I would argue no. The purpose of alts is to determine which is the best of very similar images, generally with the same EV. These alts have little in common in their usage or their value. If it's a matter of which image should be used on the article mainspace, then that is usually an issue for that articles talk page -- not the FP project. As for the images themselves, as a rule images which are used in galleries are out, and these because of their incoherence lack a solid argument for EV. Picking a single image, explaining why it adds to the article and letting it stand on its own technical merits is almost always a better way to pass a nomination and improve the project. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose both The first image is nothing special and is potentially misleading (the space shuttles didn't go anywhere near the moon), and the second photo appears to be tilted and doesn't have great EV either (it also isn't currently in any articles on this Wikipedia). Nick-D (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2014 at 18:32:49 (UTC)
Original – Grace Hopper, nicknamed "Amazing Grace" because of her significant accomplishments, was a pioneering computer scientist and eventually a rear admiral in the US Navy. She earned a Ph.D. in mathematics from Yale, and is sometimes called "the mother of COBOL". A US Navy ship and a supercomputer at the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center were named in her honor. Note that her rank was called commodore at the time, and is currently officially called rear admiral (lower half).
Notable person, and this seems to be the best quality photo that we have.
Support as nominator – Pine✉ 18:32, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Though I may not be crazy about the DOF here, this is a striking image (the contrast of her small body and the flag) and an important pioneer in computer technology. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:38, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Support for the 80s, it's quite good. Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:37, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. Good EV, nice lighting and composition, high resolution. Kaldari (talk) 23:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - A good photograph that does what a FP should: it made me curious (I read an article I otherwise wouldn't, and I learned something new).--Godot13 (talk) 08:14, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Nominator's reasons. Alborzagros (talk) 12:01, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Godot13 (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment: What's with the horizontal line on the 1 and 2 dollar bills (and maybe others)? Also, I think the EV would work better if we made the table in the article sortable (say, by denomination, year of issue, and maybe person depicted). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:36, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
The horizontal line is an "as made" security feature in the paper. Will make the table sortable within 24 hours...--Godot13 (talk) 06:16, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2014 at 13:02:24 (UTC)
Original – Anatomy of the right side of a scallop, including detailed information on the circulation and nervous systems as well as all the major organs. Note that the intestines are embedded within the gonad, and that portions of the left side (principally the gills and the shell) are not shown.
This is a renomination of this file from a year and a half ago, with much improvement/ adjustment. Image is freely licensed, is of high technical quality and biological accuracy, and has strong visual appeal. I also consider this a work in progress for the moment, and welcome any suggestions for changes or improvements to it, even minor things. This is likely to be my last FP nomination for awhile— too much time spent drawing!
Support as nominator – 4444Talk 13:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
After generating this page, I forgot to transclude it onto the list of candidates— so it is now a day or two behind schedule! Can this be taken into account when the voted are tallied? Am hoping so. It was a careless mistake on my part, and am hoping it won't end up counting against me. 4444Talk 09:39, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Barely recognized it! Very nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:35, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Though it would be best if the whole background was white, rather than just a block. You still have transparency — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:37, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment I can't quite figure out what the left branch of the Intestines label is pointing to. There's a tube on the right side, but... Maybe add a cutaway so that anatomy interior of the gonad is a little easier to see? Adam Cuerden(talk) 13:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
What is the label for the digestive gland pointing to? It seem to either be pointing to two lines or spanning an area where there doesn't seem to be anything disernable as a "gland" (I'm such a gland expert; that came out wrong, but you'd expect to see something). Also (nothing to do with the picture really), do we only normally eat female scallops? Scallops I've been server/prepared all seem to have orange "coral" (which I now know is the gonad; thanks for that!) which would suggest they are female. Belle (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
There's a bit of a yellow-brown thing just sticking out from under the stomach at the top. I think that's the gland. Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
I did wonder; perhaps some bars at the end of the crossing line would make it clearer. Belle (talk) 15:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Well done.--Godot13 (talk) 05:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Author's comment-- There seems to be some confusion regarding my annotation lines, and I definitely need to find a better way to show what is what here. The digestive gland is supposed to be the entire black mass at the top of the image, enveloping the stomach— the thing sticking out behind it is a loop of the intestine which does not pass through it but rather behind it. I think I may be able to move the intestinal loop lower, however, and clear up the confusion here and elsewhere with a different style to some of my annotation lines. Gimme just a coupla minutes to see if I can wrangle it into place! And thank you all for the commentary! 4444Talk 13:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Small comments. The "Anterior" arrow is not exactly horizontal. There is a border of transparency around the white background which seems unnecessary. It is not very clear to me what "Adductor muscle" is pointing to. Is it the whole of the whitish mass in the middle of the creature or something around its edge? 188.8.131.52 (talk) 13:34, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Oh, also, I'm not quite clear if the gill is the bright orange semi-circle or the yellow section just above it - the pointer points directly between them. If it's both, it'd be better to put the pointer on both; if not, one of them is unlabelled. Adam Cuerden(talk) 13:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Author's follow-up I believe I have fixed these lingering ambiguities. I have used annotation lines with circles at the ends to indicate whole organs (please let me know if there are any which still seem ambiguous or confusing) and have added some text to make the locations of some overlapping organs more explicit. 4444Talk 14:15, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Very, very nice. Your images always start good, and end fantastic. Support. Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I have one further cosmetic suggestion: It would be nice if the "Anterior" and "Posterior" labels and arrows looked more symmetrical, i.e. had the same vertical positioning and had more similar (mirror image) spatial relationships between text and arrow. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 17:56, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
An excellent suggestion. Let me do that right now. 4444Talk 01:17, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Below minimum resolution, and Darwinius masillae is a redirect (and thus should not be counted as an "article in which this image appears"). That being said, this appears to be an image of the fossil in situ and is thus very useful and rare. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
IAR Support - Agree with Crisco. Adam Cuerden(talk) 17:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2014 at 15:32:42 (UTC)
Original – Banquet Still Life, by Adriaen van Utrecht, 1644. A feast of fruits, food, drink, exotic objects, musical instruments, a dog, parrot and a monkey - is depicted in this painting - where the painter's sense of rhythm enables him to capture the vital element in each of his objects. As a consequence, his compositions unfold a most refined elegance: both elaborate and complex, radiant with the purple of the shelfish, the golden of the lemons and metal objects and the soft flesh of fruits. Everything is painted with precision and virtuosity.
Support Stunning, never seen this before. Brandmeistertalk 22:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Fantastic detail.--Godot13 (talk) 05:43, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support It's a lovely painting. Lighting could have been slightly better - cracks are hard to minimize the view of, though, and it is otherwise, excellent. Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:03, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Support An excellent painting --ȸ (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Banquet Still Life, Adriaen van Utrecht, 1644 - Rijksmuseum.jpg --The herald 15:29, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
6 support, 0 oppose... The herald 15:29, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
@The Herald: In the future please don't close nominations until the voting period didn't ended. Thanks. ArmbrustHomunculus 15:34, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Hafspajen (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Lovely painting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Interesting composition (the geranium seems to be stroking his hair while he caresses its roots; "oooooo, caress my roots"). Belle (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. A quality reproduction and an interesting portrait. And what Belle said. Although I think he's too innocent and pure looking to be complicit in the geranium's kinky games... ;-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 23:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Lovely; both a highly notable subject and artist. Adam Cuerden(talk) 14:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Rembrandt Peale - Rubens Peale with a Geranium - Google Art Project.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 16:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment - If this is meant to illustrate Kufic script, wouldn't a written example have more value? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:42, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
I assume that you are meaning handwritten, yes it is. If you are referring to a scanned image, I have including an Alt. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 14:15, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand what Crisco 1492 is talking about either (not dissing him; I just don't understand), but the original is much the better of the two pictures. Unfortunately the bleed-through from the reverse of the page makes it a bit indistinct. Belle (talk) 14:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Bleed through might be expected on a handwritten manuscript. Anyway, the contrast is high enough to outweigh the bleed somewhat. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 19:50, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Fauzan appears to have understood just fine. Since the source says handschrift, I guess you're right about it being hand-written. Support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:35, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support A fine image for illustrating the script. Adam Cuerden(talk) 20:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support A fine handmade image illustrating the Quran, one of the most important religious scripts. Hafspajen (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose original, weak support alt 1 I don't like the angle and unsharp focus throughout the image. It's better to present the entire page, which alt 1 does, but it's slightly below the minimum size requirements. Brandmeistertalk 08:58, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment - re: Original, beautiful script for sure, but it would be great if we could get a photo of an original rather than a photo of a print/book reproduction of an original - Tokugawapants (talk) 06:16, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
@Tokugawapants: Isn't the original image a photograph of an original? That gold leaf doesn't look like something that's printed. Adam Cuerden(talk) 20:40, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden: Thank you for your comment. Just to clarify, I'm referring to the original as in File:Quran_Kufic_script.jpg, not File:4.8-17-1990-Guld-koranside-recto-og-verso.jpg. The gold leaf from File:4.8-17-1990-Guld-koranside-recto-og-verso.jpg looks authentic. Anyway, I'll concede that I'm not 100% sure that File:Quran_Kufic_script.jpg is a photo of a reprint/reproduction, but I strongly suspect it. If you zoom in 100% (or see example). It's possible that the pattern is actually the texture of the paper, but the resemblance to the pattern (shape- and color-wise) is uncanny, and although I don't know much about the material that this kind of calligraphy would appear on, I have a feeling that it wouldn't have a coarse, canvas-like texture like this. The source of the image is a Flickr page, and that page doesn't give any information about the actual source. I anyone else could weigh in on this it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Tokugawapants (talk) 04:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment Image description of alt contradicts the article about whether Kufic could have originated in Kufa or not (image description says, "erroneously believed to have originated", but article has a reference from the British Museum - reliable source?). I think this should be resolved. Samsara (FA • FP) 19:06, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Support — The amazing Einstein at 42; nowadays audiences probably are more accustomed to seeing shots of him in later life, when he lived in the U.S. Sca (talk) 13:43, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Nice. I'm not sure why he has a tube connecting his head to his shoulder though; perhaps it is a connection to a backup brain, or maybe a handle to make him easier to manage if you are carrying a lot of theoretical physicists (that's probably it; Enrico Fermi had wheels and Richard Feynman had a hook that allowed you to attach him to shopping trolley). Belle (talk) 14:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - 3rd time's the charm? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:57, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - per Crisco...--Godot13 (talk) 05:12, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support -- Hey, that's my nom!!.. :-) The herald 14:45, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Hafspajen (talk) 19:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC)(but keep why hands like Napoleon...?)
Honestly, probably just a way of keeping it still. Remember, there were ridiculously long development times for early photographs. They had to have hidden neckbraces. Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:57, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - fine historical photo. Jusdafax 20:36, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Mathew Brady - Franklin Pierce.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 14:43, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2014 at 16:37:18 (UTC)
Original The painting Niagara Falls, from the American Side was commissioned by the American art dealer Michael Knoedler in 1866. Church was selected to represent the USA at the International Exposition (1867) in Paris and possibly intended to participate with this painting.
Niagara Falls, from the American Side is a painting by the American artist Frederic Edwin Church (1826-1900) from 1867. Church is noted as one of the most outstanding Romantic landscape painters from the United States. He was part of the American art movement called Hudson River School, a group of landscape painters whose aesthetic vision was influenced by the romanticism. Frederic Edwin Church made a series of paintings on the falls. The most famous of them - "Niagara Falls, from the American Side" was painted in 1867 and is currently located in the collection of the National Gallery of Scotland.
Oppose - beautiful painting and this seems like a detailed scan but there are terribly abundant JPEG artifacts along the top (in the sky) and along the left towards the top (in the trees) - Tokugawapants (talk) 06:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - I can see some marks, but it looks like defects in the painting (maybe creating unofocused artefacts in the scan)- vertical dark lines above the trees. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2014 at 05:20:51 (UTC)
Original – One hard dollar (unissued, 1820s) created by Gregor MacGregor from the fictional Bank of Poyais (part of an elaborate con).
High quality image, high EV. One dollar, Bank of Poyais, Republic of Poyais (1820s). After fighting in South and Central America, Scottish soldier Gregor MacGregor created an elaborate con claiming to have been made a Cacique of the entirely fictitious Cazique of Poyais, all in an effort to defraud land investors. Nearly 200 died in 1822–23 in connection with MacGregor’s deception. An unissued “banknote” designed and printed by MacGregor as part of his con.
Support Fascinating but sad story associated with it (I may try it myself if I run short of funds). It isn't "unissued" or "hard" though; it seems he did issue them in exchange for real currencies, and this note is a promise for a "hard" dollar. Belle (talk) 10:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Belle-unissued is referring to this particular piece (e.g., lack of a serial number, date, and signatures).
Support - Interesting backstory to this note. Good enough EV for his Cazique of Poyais. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support — Interesting story indeed — shades of Evelyn Waugh's Ishmaelia in Scoop.Sca (talk) 15:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Bank of Poyais-1 Hard Dollar (1820s) SCAM.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 12:28, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – The herald 14:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Question - What does this illustrate that the current FP doesn't? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492: Good question. This nom is in infrared but the FP is in filters like [O III] and (Ha), thus the image showing different compositions and quality. This is the way in which many astro FPs differ from each other, though the subject (sometimes, even perspective) being the same. Plus, you can't see the eye in the current FP. The herald 08:30, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Support it can complement each other. This one is almost better too, clearer. Hafspajen (talk) 23:18, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Support I don't think we always use these images as well as we should in articles, but this is a very useful image in astronomy. We just need to do a better job explainig what each type of image shows. Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:38, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Support well balanced diagonal composition, lovely colour scale, a voluptuous and sensual painting. Like the rising sun and the copper echo the colour of the robe. And a nice new article too. Hafspajen (talk) 23:32, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
I have never seen a Hogarth print before that lacked edges. I think this has had scissors taken to it, and the article confirms there should be text below it - and thus a border around it. Oppose barring contrary arguments. Adam Cuerden(talk) 03:18, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
That's the one from the ticket then? It looks like an etching (shaky lines that remain at constant width) with maybe some engraving in parts. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:54, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Question - While this artist's work does usually come with margins, is it possible that this impression represents something prior to the final state printing? I have seen engravers' personal albums in which half of the impressions are without margins (though that seemed to be the case more often for the landscapes).--Godot13 (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
From Hogarth and His Times: Serious Comedy, David Bindman. p 169- it's an etching. Bindman illustrates the whole ticket here. He suggests that Hogarth issued the ticket to raise funds for the final print. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment Perhaps we should obtain a featurable version of this painting, as I'm not that attracted to this candidate. Plus, there's a pretty girl alongside Columbus on that painting, where he is impressing her as well... Brandmeistertalk 15:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Pine✉ 01:12, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment - I won't make it be the basis of an opposition, but I cannot help but be distracted by the hat Colin Firth is wearing gets cut off at the top. The rest of the image is just fine. But that one part really has it be the part my eyes get fixed on when looking at the picture. GamerPro64 04:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment I far prefer The uncropped version for illustrating anything to do with the film: Showing the set is equally as important as the actors. Also, the crop seems really tight. Adam Cuerden(talk) 04:25, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose This image (and the uncropped version) clearly has significant EV, but are let down greatly as the top of the film's main character's head is not in frame Nick-D (talk) 06:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Definitely high EV for the article its on. As well as looking amazing. A real contrast from those "What's the deal with airline food?" jokes. Would be a great addition to the Food and Drink section of FP.
Support - Useful, very useful. Yes, this is certainly not economy class. The copyright symbol is not inherently incompatible with a CC license; CC license are also copyright licenses, and some people mark their copyright with the (c) symbol. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. CarGT 15:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Eh, With strawberries and chocolate sauce? No, not economy class. Description should go something like this: Parma ham and hard cheese, cold cuts, salami, olive, pickled herring, tomato sallad (?), grilled vegetables (paprika, zuccini and fennel), buns, jam, strawberries and chocolate sauce and mineral water. Yummie. Hafspajen (talk) 10:20, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Actually, are we positive that the stuff at the top is jam? It is rather disappointing that what is shown wasn't originally explained. GamerPro64 00:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Use to be jam in all kinds of Airline Food. Chili can't be. Hafspajen (talk) 13:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Where is the jam? I don't see any ... 220.127.116.11 (talk) 02:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The menu is: boquerones, olive tapenade, sun-ripened tomatoes and fresh basil in olive oil, jamon, manchego, fuet, chorizo, grilled vegetables, chocolate mousse, fresh strawberries, and freshly baked bread basket according to the Tapas menu here (so no jam apart from the jam-on; hilarious bi-lingual pun; ten cuidado you don't laugh your cabeza off). Belle (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Added the menu into the description. Thank you Belle for finding that out. GamerPro64 00:19, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Support I should start flying Austrian Airlines... --CarGT 15:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - per EuroCarGT--Godot13 (talk) 05:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment I'm somewhat worried about the illustrations at Airline meal - they're all on the high end, higher-fare meals, from smaller carriers, save the one. It's not a particularly representative sampling. Adam Cuerden(talk) 10:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
If security doesn't jump me for packing a canon in my carry-on (*ouch that hurt*), I'll try and get something when I fly back to Canada in December. But yeah, it's not going to be FP quality. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:11, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd have to agree with that sentiment. After the uproar over the Big Mac a month ago, this seems to confirm the reviewer bias. It is a rather commercial shot, which functions as a plug for the airline ("I should start flying Austrian Airlines..."). It looks very little like the fare most travelers will see. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 00:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
You have a point. The food was made by Do & Co, a catering company that provides the food for the airline. But you can also say that this image can be a plug for Do & Co, which, according to its article, provides "services through its restaurants, bars, lounges, and hotels." GamerPro64 00:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
One problem is that essentially anything can be seen as a "plug" for something. Mona Lisa? Plug for the Louvre. The God's Eye? Plug for NASA and its telescopes. This one has a bit more commercial value than the two (admittedly extreme) examples I brought up, but so did the jet engine we let fly through a couple years ago. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I think this is different from those cases: this was produced by Austrian Airlines not a neutral party, and is a product that can be accessed much more easily than a jet engine. The quote I used was directly from one of the reviewers here - it seemed poignant. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I like it, and discussion is long enough now. Recently we blocked an editor because it turned nominations into articles. Keep discussion to essential. Also if that same editor would be using IPs (as before) to comment that would be socking. Not helpful.Hafspajen (talk) 11:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I assure you Hafspajen that I am not a sock. And that I have been involved with this project on and off, with and without an account for longer than most (5 years now). The discussion doesn't have a character limit, I think you should apologize for implying my comments were unessential or unhelpful - or at the very least provide some evidence. Otherwise, welcome to the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Bless you my child if you say the thruth. No, not anyone - not if somebody is blocked. Hafspajen (talk) 16:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2014 at 18:17:40 (UTC)
Original – Alexander Roslin was a Swedish painter who went abroad to live at the courts of Bayreuth, Parma, Rome, and finally settled down in Paris, where he was admitted to the French Academy of Fine Arts. Roslin painted numerous portraits of members of the European nobility and of leading political and cultural circles, royalty and high society as well. His work were enormously popular thanks to the fabulous way Roslin could render the texture of precious materials such as fabrics, lace, silk, velvet, pearls, gold and jewels, as well as his talent to show people at their best.
Alexander Roslin (1718-1793) was one of the leading portraitists of his time, who mixed classicist elements in his paintings with the Rococo style in its elegance and charm. Roslin's own wife, Marie-Suzanne Giroust was also a painter and artist. Roslin painted in 1767 a double portrait of them both; she is depicted working in pastels on a portrait. The painting in the painting depicts a third person, Henrik Wilhelm Peill, the couples friend. Roslin points in the painting at a gold box he received from Peill as a present. On the frame of the painting (not visible here) is inscribed Loin et près (Far away and yet close), showing that the portrait was a token of friendship. The painting was purchased by Henrik Wilhelm Peill and remained in his family for many generations.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2014 at 19:08:43 (UTC)
Original – The Lady with the Veil (the Artist's Wife)
Marie-Suzanne Giroust was a French painter, miniaturist and pastellist. She was a member of the Académie de peinture et de sculpture. She was married to the Swedish painter Alexander Roslin. She was an artist of her own right, as you can see on the nomination above. One of the most famous portraits made by his husband The Lady with the Veil : (citation) Ironically, Roslin’s best-known portrait by far, The Lady with the Veil, is not of a member of the high society, but of his own wife, Marie-Suzanne Giroust. Roslin depicted her as a Bolognese lady dressed up for the carnival. Her mischievous smile, the veil and the fan in her hand have strong amorous connotations. The seductive quality was not lost on the famous philosopher and critic Denis Diderot, who, when he saw the painting on show at the Parisian Salon, characterized it as ‘très piquante’.
Support as nominator – شاه بابل (talk) 02:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose It needs to be cropped from the top part. Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Could anyone help him with an ALT, a cropped one? Hafspajen (talk) 09:20, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose The article doesn't mention modern schools in this city, much less schools existent in 1910, so it has little EV. The image quality also isn't particularly great. Nick-D (talk) 07:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - a very original painting capturing the psychological essence of the of the depicted man. The energy and personality is well captured and not there in the same way in the photos. It is about the painting not his political views or what kind of personality he has.Hafspajen (talk) 09:23, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Paul Fildes, until just now, had no illustration. That's changed now, and with a painting by his highly notable artist father. Since there was no illustration, and thus changes are highly unlikely, I have... not waited a week.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2014 at 15:54:16 (UTC)
Original – Garde (Garda) Church, Gotland
alt – Somewhat straightened, edited. Not for voting
I nominate this because I think it's a beautiful, well-composed and well-lighted photo of an interesting building. Garde Church is good representative for the unique church building tradition on Gotland, and therefore has an interesting encyclopaedic value. The license is free and the image verifiable (via a link to the Swedish National Heritage Board). (PS. This is my first FP nom, let me know if I missed anything!)
Support as nominator – Yakikaki (talk) 15:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose as there is colour fringing (green and magenta on the edges between the dark and light areas), and the tower and spire are leaning over backwards- this is from the photographer pointing the camera slightly upwards. The mass of leaves on the right, although filling in the area nicely is perhaps a bit too dark. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Withdraw Points taken, I will try to find some better candidate, if I can. Yakikaki (talk) 16:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
The faults are fixable- the colour fringing would take a bit of time though. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments! That sounds encouraging in principle, but I'm afraid I personally don't know if I have either the software or the skills to do it. -Yakikaki (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
If there was a less tight crop to work with, I could probably do something. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
The alt is what I meant. I could probably straighten it a bit better if I had the original file. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:46, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Slightly too far If you've got a spare six months, there's about 200,000 other photos with the same problem… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:34, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I recognized that. I can play with it further, later, but even then I think the crop is too tight to really be worth being featured. This ALT's just a proof of concept. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:11, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, sorry for my long silence - I'm having a hectic time IRL. Thanks for this very kind attempt to save the picture, I'm actually quite touched, and feel all the more sorry for not being able to provide a really good solution, myself. Such kind helpfulness is always much appreciated. :) Yakikaki (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 15:41:57 (UTC)
Original – American cartoonist Peter Kuper at the Bangalore Comic Con 2014
Let me start by stating how difficult it is to get a good picture at comic con. There are just so many people and getting the subject isolated is quite the challenge. I feel this is a dynamic view of the person albeit a little color bland. The best picture we have of him.
I'm pretty excited about this one- a high-resolution image of a tiny jellyfish from an open access journal article. We have a lot of fantastic images from open access journals (see Commons:Commons:Open Access File of the Day for more), but, sadly, they're mostly too low in resolution terms for FP nominations. Just so we're clear, there has been a little bit of cropping and cloning in this case to "undo" the modifications made by the article authors. See the image page for details.
Support as nominator – Hafspajen (talk) 20:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Support: Thanks again, Hafspajen, for the description. I suppose it is becoming obvious that I adore vivid brilliant colours. Nothing drab here. This landscape just glows! Fylbecatuloustalk 22:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - This is an absolutely massive work, 432 cm by 584 cm. The resolution of the scan isn't nearly up to the threshold established by most of our other painting FPs. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:22, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Another reason to make sure the file description page is accurate. Support. This resolution for a 43 * 58 cm painting is acceptable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:46, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Eh, well, sorry, it never occured to me - I know this painting and knew it wasn't big. Just checked 2,253 × 1,654 pixels, well, I thought - that should be enough... (Is this a new trend Support at the end? )Hafspajen (talk) 11:20, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
As one would expect for a pre-Raphælite, a gorgeous use of colour and form. SupportAdam Cuerden(talk) 02:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Support- although this is a lot brighter than the Tate's image of the same painting here. The location's on cliffs near Hastings (Covehurst Bay)- two massive landslips of different ages can be seen. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, the Tate is darker. But this is a picture that is renowned for its very bright colours, VIDEO and this is a Google art project scan. Some people even say it is too bright, depending on taste and preferences. Hafspajen (talk) 11:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, this image does seem the right brightness now. It is a very strange painting. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 20:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:William Holman Hunt - Our English Coasts, 1852 (`Strayed Sheep') - Google Art Project.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 20:35, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2014 at 21:35:28 (UTC)
Original – Precious Metal racing in the Unlimited Gold Final Heat at the 2014 Reno Air Races
One of a kind P 51XR Mustang N6WJ Precious Metal Reno Air Races 2014. This is the ONLY P 51 in the world that runs a Rolls-Royce Griffon engine originally produced for the British Spitfire, this plane also features Contra-rotating propellers as you can see in the photo. The pilot is Thom Richard.
Support as nominator – talk→WPPilot 21:35, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - striking picture - (hope nobody comes with some technicality I never discovered) Hey, it's like the Swedish flag...Hafspajen (talk) 21:57, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
FYI the pilot is Swedish. talk→WPPilot 00:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Weak support - A fair bit of motion blur, but the text is mostly sharp, so that's not an oppose for me. Perhaps next time you can increase your ISO to 320 to get down to 1/1600 or so... might help cut back on motion blur. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
It is tough @ 500MPH but thanks for the comment Crisco, will do. talk→WPPilot 00:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose I dont think its a blur thing, to me it looks like the focus has been slightly missed --Muhammad(talk) 04:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Muhammad, you have contributed some wonderful photos to Wikipedia and I wanted to address your comment. This plane is about 200 feet away, traveling at 450mph, fifty feet off the ground. I am stationary, on the ground (about 200 feet away), so the slight blur that you mention is the sheer speed of the subject. Cheers! talk→WPPilot 17:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I understand the difficulty, maybe I was being harsh --Muhammad(talk) 17:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Great mid-flight shot that captures important features of the plane, such as the contra-rotating propellers mentioned in the description. I, JethroBTdrop me a line 19:06, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Weak support Have been thinking a lot about this one. I still dont like the blur/OOF but it is the best image we have of the aircraft --Muhammad(talk) 18:15, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:25 P 51XR Mustang N6WJ Precious Metal Reno Air Race 2014 photo D Ramey Logan.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 21:39, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Is this a juvenile? She seems so strange, hairless like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Weak Support - The reflection on the leaf is too bright, I'm afraid. Also, a photo from the front would have been much more interesting, although this one captures the pattern on the back rather nicely.--Ebertakis (talk) 22:53, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Not that worried about the reflections. Some leaves are shiny. For identification purposes, this angle is far better; we could do a front view as well, but I don't think that's a good argument against this one, as we'd need both. Adam Cuerden(talk) 07:41, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Not going to bash Omama ysouskari to bits with books? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:38, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
...It's kinda cute. My relationship with spiders is weird. Adam Cuerden(talk) 08:51, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Adam likes them with no hair... --Muhammad(talk) 11:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
And, apparently, Crisco likes them with long, sharp spikes. Adam Cuerden(talk) 00:50, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
All the better to take over the world with. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Reluctant oppose - Love the photo but I don't consider GFDL 1.2-only to be a legitimate free license for images, and I don't think we should be providing free advertising for commercial photography. Kaldari (talk) 03:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
While I dont agree with your vote reasoning, I was under the impression I had uploaded it with FAL. Now it's dual licensed --Muhammad(talk) 04:31, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Support now as it is more free to reuse now. A good, detailed view, describing the subject. But not happy with the lights which affects the artistic beauty. You need to diffuse the light, if flash is necessary! Jee 07:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm not too concerned about the light since a diffuser is almost always part of my setup . The subject is well lit and not blown; the cuticles of some leaves are just reflective.--Muhammad(talk) 08:10, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Indeed. Heck, I get such highlights even without flash on some leaves. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 18:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes; I know. But it is not a positive feature and should be avoided as much as possible. ;) Jee 02:28, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – talk→WPPilot 01:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose original, OOF. Focus is a bit better on the ALT, but still not at FP quality. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:36, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Alt.1: Voodoo P 51 Alt 1 2014 Gold Champion 2014 Reno Air Race
Oppose -- Per Crisco. Not just FP quality. @WPPilot: As I said in your earlier nomination, its better if the perspective is from front. I advise you to go thorough the images of other FPs of the category and keep their quality in mind while going for another nomination.--The herald 12:58, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2014 at 02:29:21 (UTC)
Original – Venetia James as painted by Luke Fildes. A society hostess, racehorse breeder, and godmother of Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom.
How about a little more Luke Fildes? We have three good copies of paintings by him; this is the only of the three with a detailed background (compare the stark simplicity of the Paul Fildes image below).
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2014 at 21:01:37 (UTC)
Original – Pembroke College is one of the constituent colleges of the University of Oxford in England, which was founded in 1624 by King James I. It was named after William Herbert, 3rd Earl of Pembroke, Lord Chamberlain and then-Chancellor of the University.
High quality image about a notable college = high EV.
The old joke goes like this - American tourists: "How do you get your lawns looking so great?" College gardener: "Just water and cut them twice a week for 500 years..." BencherliteTalk 18:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment. If there is any opportunity to retake this, I feel it would be better if some kind of neutral (but discernible) background features were visible. As it is, it seems rather "disembodied", like it's floating in space. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I suspect there isn't going to be an opportunity to re-take it. If I understand it correctly, Evan borrows these often-obscure items from collectors for the purpose of photographing them. A white background is a fairly common (and admittedly slightly boring) setting for product images such as this. It isn't to everyone's tastes, but it does isolate the subject and is usable in more circumstances than other backdrops. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Aesthetically, perhaps a good idea, and if this were Commons almost certainly expected. For use in depicting a video game system itself, however, that would just add distractions; a plain white background is common for product photography, although admittedly a little visually boring. The WikiProject Video games people would also be unlikely to use it, as they already have something (this) that suits their purpose. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
I suspect it could float in space anyway; I think I saw one of these in the fleet in Battlestar Galactica. Belle (talk) 10:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. Until 2003??? Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
This says support ended in 2003, though they stopped production in 1994. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support A good photograph of the Famicom. Adam Cuerden(talk) 07:43, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support This picture of an old plastic box with electronics inside is good for illustrating the article on this old plastic box with electronics inside and comparing to other old plastic boxes with electronics inside. Belle (talk) 10:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Nintendo-Famicom-Disk-System.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 10:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Portrait made by Jan van Eyck (1390-1441), Flemish early Netherlandish Renaissance painter. Van Eyck's portraits are characterized by a meticulous attention to detail and for the naturalness of his depictions, and - (art history) - remember (!) this (1390-1441) was long before Michelangelo (1475 – 1564) and Raphael (1483 –1520). Check out the Italians of his time how they painted, Fra Angelico (1395 – 1455), Masaccio (1401 – 1428), Andrea Mantegna (1431 – 1506) - and you will see the differnce, come on - this was huge then! You may think 50 yeas here or there around Renaissance it doesn't matter - but it DOES. This was fantastic then. Van Eyck was highly regarded as a portrait painter of his time, painting even everyday people when portrait painting was no longer only for the royalty or the high aristocracy. The merchant middle class, influenced by the humanist ideas of individual identity, wanted now to be depicted as well.
Support as nominator – The herald 16:29, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Support This is a very good image. There's always been cycles in the popularity of different types of images at FPC, but this image is good enough that we need to break out of the cycle for it.. Adam Cuerden(talk) 02:27, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support I agree, it is a wonderful image. talk→WPPilot 02:50, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2014 at 17:44:19 (UTC)
Original – Mõdriku manor in Mõdriku, Estonia. The manor appears in written sources for the first time in 1470. Over the centuries, it has been the property of various Baltic German families, including several successive generations of the von Kaulbars family. Perhaps most notably, it belonged to the Russian general and explorer Alexander Kaulbars. The presently visible building traces its oldest parts to the 17th century.
Support as nominator – Yakikaki (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment considering that this is a giant file, would it be possible to just crop off a little to the right, that car at the right side? I think the picture would gain on it, it would became cleaner. Hafspajen (talk) 19:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Sure, I've created a cropped version, should I upload it using the "upload a new version of this file" button, or as a separate, new file? -Yakikaki (talk) 19:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Separate. And post as Alt. Hafspajen (talk) 22:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I think the alt is much too cramped. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support original. Not the most interesting building, but it has good EV nonetheless. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support any - but this crop was not quite how I meant, I only meant removing the car to right, nothing else. Hafspajen (talk) 18:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Weak support original (a straight head-on shot may be more useful), oppose alt: too tight. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:09, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support original — The left side of the image could be cropped if necessary, but the tree at left provides framing, and the car at right is too close to the building to be cropped out (one wouldn't want to show part of it). Sca (talk) 14:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – CarGT 00:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Although there's blur below the helicopter, this is just the exhaust fumes being blown downwards. Was initially a little put off by this, but can see it's unavoidable. Otherwise, perfectly clear... hiley 12:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. Composition and sharpness is good and shows quite a dynamic scene. Resolution is relatively low but enough. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 17:40, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support per Dillif, hurray for Canada Coast Guard! Hafspajen (talk) 00:11, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Exciting and dynamic; useful. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:39, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2014 at 01:14:57 (UTC)
High quality, high EV (presented as a set). Complete set of serial #1 Series 1928 U.S. Gold certificates. While lower denomination Series 1928 Gold certificates ($10, $20, $50) are obtainable, $100 notes are rare in uncirculated condition but obtainable in lower grades. $500 and $1,000 are seldom seen in high grade and are rare in any condition. The $5,000 and $10,000 notes pictured below are the only examples known to exist. In addition, each note is the first printed for its denomination and therefore the very first small size Gold certificates made. From the U.S. Treasury Department collection transferred to the National Numismatic Collection in 1978.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2014 at 08:47:19 (UTC)
Original – Midsummer Eve Bonfire on Skagen Beach a 1906 painting by P.S. Krøyer. The large work, which took several years to complete, shows many of the artists in the group known as the Skagen Painters as well as influential members of Skagen's local community.
High quality scan of a notable artwork, useful for illustrating the people and styles of the movement as well.
Support High quality scan. Looks good to me. ter 09:45, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Looks good to me too. Hafspajen (talk) 11:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support — Nicely done, could/should be added to Midsummer. (But ... no witch-burning?) Sca (talk) 14:04, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Support — Don't know if they're witches, but those two standing downwind are going to get plenty of holes in their clothes. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
That's his wife and her lover (psychologists: does this mean he was really happy she had fallen in love again or not?). Belle (talk) 10:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Alfvén's standing by the boat, looking very pensive- she's got a (quite attractive) self-satisfied smirk. Don't know who the other two are. There's some great character painting in this. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 22:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Did you mean the guy with the beard and the hat? That's Holger Drachmann with his wife Soffi. Krøyer probably wanted to singe him a bit too (beard envy). Belle (talk) 22:54, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that's him, with his weird right hand (assuming it is his hand!). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 23:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Saved me nominating more Krøyer. Belle (talk) 10:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Midsummer Eve bonfire on Skagen's beach - P.S. Krøyer - Google Cultural Institute.jpg --ArmbrustHomunculus 08:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I thought that when I first looked at the small-scale picture. However, when you zoom right in close, the animal's skin texture and pattern does not look like that of an earthworm, at least not any earthworm that I'm familiar with, and it does not appear to be segmented, which I believe all earthworms are. It does look more reptilian to me, although I'm not sure at all.184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
The skin texture and pattern are similar to those of legless lizards. My best bet so far is this species, but I'm no expert either. --Ebertakis (talk) 20:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2014 at 02:22:38 (UTC)
Original – Austro-Hungarian operetta composer Franz Lehár.
There was, unfortunately, a period between the long exposure cameras and the faster cameras that allowed a bit less freezing in place when images were fast - but very grainy. As far as I can tell, this comes from that period. However, it's an expressive image, it's good for the period, and, frankly, there don't seem to be many photographs of him that are particularly good. This is probably the best.
Articles in which this image appears
Franz Lehár + his operas [the latter as part of a template at the start of each]
Support - Useful, and I agree that it's better than most images of him. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:47, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Platinum print (thought it was a lithograph at first, but the dark areas appear to be integrated into the paper grain). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Oh, not Lehár of all people, how did you found him? The operette King. Hafspajen (talk) 12:27, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
@Hafspajen: I just saw Der Graf von Luxemburg a few days ago - a joy from start to finish - and searched around to see if there was anything good for him. This was hiding on the Library of Congress. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:39, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Pine✉ 06:19, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment If I understand the Big Bang expansion correctly, it should be presented rather as an expanding sphere, not as a one-direction tube-shaped pattern. Also, the letters after the first word in labels like "Quantum Fluctuations", "Development of Galaxies...", "Dark Energy Accelerated Expansion", etc should be decapitalized. Brandmeistertalk 11:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
It's pretty standard to reduce the three spacial dimensions to a simplified two when trying to show time or another scalar value over them. Think of the rubber sheet model of gravity - it loses Z-axis to use it for something else. Likely, most depictions of the light cone either reduce distance in space to one signed value, or show two-dimensional space. It's standard. While you could show this as a series of spheres or spheres inside each other, you'd probably end up showing less information, as you'd lose the smoothness of the time axis, as well as making it harder to see what's happening. Adam Cuerden(talk) 22:54, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Pretty sure I saw this on a book cover recently. The cup shape is because inflation makes the bottom thick, then expansion slowed. Time progresses left to right. I don't think we should decapitalize the titles - if it were designed by a Wikipedian, yes, but it's a valid convention. Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Support--Brandmeister had it wrong to say about the shape. You can't show the acceleration of dark matter in a sphere. Plus there isn't any alternative way to represent the theory (though I don't believe it). --The herald 15:27, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Vote from sock puppet violating a block has been removed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:14, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Question What's the "lens flare" at the beginning represent? Or is it just inspired by J.J. Abrams? Presumably quantum fluctuations don't emit anything backwards into the nothingness of nothing. Belle (talk) 10:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
I've got no idea either- what does it (and the orange ring) represent? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:46, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
As from this file, I think its the big bang (and the associated bursts) and the space shows (IMO) the lag between inflation and the bang. But still doubt about the orange thermal rings. --The herald 13:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2014 at 15:34:37 (UTC)
St Peter and St Paul's Church, Vilnius
Looking east towards the altar
Looking west towards the entrance
If this set doesn't get the required support, I promise, I'll never nominate another set again. ;-) I think this set could be the strongest candidate of mine so far. It's a series of four images taken inside the St. Peter and St. Paul's Church in Vilnius and each image features a different view of the intricate stucco reliefs in this amazing Baroque church. All four are very high resolution, architecturally correct images of the interior.
Promoted File:St. Peter and St. Paul's Church 1, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpgArmbrustHomunculus 15:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:St. Peter and St. Paul's Church 2, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpgArmbrustHomunculus 15:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:St. Peter and St. Paul's Church 3, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpgArmbrustHomunculus 15:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC) Promoted File:St. Peter and St. Paul's Church Ceiling, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpgArmbrustHomunculus 15:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – The herald 15:50, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - Wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too many compression artefacts. One does not simply put 2000*1500px in a 150kb file and expect it to be good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose- The stripy shadow in the lower left corner is probably an example. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:43, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support – Gorgious and notable painting, high quality giant scan, one can see the surface of the painting and each and every little crack and brushwork. The blue colour is holdig together the sky, the garments and the textile under the Child. And before somebody starts arguing, paintings in the Renaissance were often painted by several old masters, that cooperated in workshops - that is not an issue. Not here not anywhere, that's usual standard procedure throug the Renaissance and also art history, see at Atelier.Hafspajen (talk) 12:43, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment This is a good artwork, people. Hafspajen (talk) 12:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Did not expect the image to be so detailed.... Tokugawapants (talk) 10:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Support as nominator – Godot13 (talk) 03:23, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - 300-year-old exchequer notes don't come up every day. Very useful (I was snooping your contributions and had half a mind to nominate this myself, but now I see you got to it first) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Exceptional quality image and useful as a historical reference. Good encyclopedic value. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 05:31, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support — Historical EV, quality image. Sca (talk) 14:47, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Original records such as this (e.g., connected to the subject of an article and illustrative of an important process in the history of the Dutch East Indies) are important.--Godot13 (talk) 14:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Support, per Godot13 -- such documents have invaluable historical and encyclopedic application. Nice image btw. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2014 at 03:57:09 (UTC)
Original – Tuterei Karewa, chief of the Māori tribe called the Ngāti Maru of North Island, New Zealand. Photo dated sometime between 1890 - 1920. The subject's facial markings (moko) have been enhanced by the original photographer, possibly using black paint.
High res image from the Google Art Project. High EV for own bio and example of these Maori face markings in a photographic setting.
Comment - Could use restoration. What are the Maori views on photographs of deceased ancestors? I understand that the Australian Aborigines are highly against it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. Restoration would still be nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
ALT1 - Restored version
@Crisco 1492: I don't have any experience in photo restoration, but I agree with you, and so I decided to learn the basics and apply them here. It's not perfect, but I figured it's a start. I tried to remove some of the most prominent scratches, stray marks, and some folding marks on the photograph. I also considered cropping a bit off the top, but I was on the fence about it. Is there too much space at the top? I, JethroBTdrop me a line 22:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Weak oppose since the image has been altered by the original photographer how can we be sure his touch up work is accurate? Seems less than encyclopedic. Nice image though. I gave a weak oppose as I could be talked into it if another had a good argument.--Mark Miller (talk) 07:14, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
I understand that. I have a number of these old images myself (not of Maori) and am also an old school photographer, taught how to use film cameras, develop the film, print the photos using light processing in a dark room and how to touch up the photos. From my experience with these touch up products, the image can be altered drastically. In looking closely at the touch up work here, it becomes difficult to tell where the originating line of the tattoos end and the touch up begins....but you can clearly see the brush strokes. I suppose if there were at least one other image of the subject without the touch up work to see that tattoos that might help. --Mark Miller (talk) 18:46, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
OK, looking at other images and looking closer at this one, it appears the tattoos on the chin have been altered and simplified.--Mark Miller (talk) 18:49, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
It appears that the photographer of the FPC altered the chin tattoo drastically from the additional image you provided. The original image is large enough to see a good portion of the tattoo in the photo nominated has indeed been touched up a great deal and is no longer an accurate depiction of the subject. Sad, because the photo is excellent.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
@Mark Miller: Curses, I didn't notice the chin while cleaning it up. I'll let others decide on whether this kind of manipulation is acceptable or not; that said, it's very frustrating to me that Iles would change the markings on the chin in this manner. I, JethroBTdrop me a line 20:29, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
I assume that the photographer developed the photograph itself once he returned to his lab and was nowhere near the subject and just did what he thought would be good enough. And yeah...curses indeed! It is truly frustrating to see such fantastic and historic images manipulated in this manner today. it takes away so much.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:00, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose – The light is too harsh and the flower patterns "pop" too much (perhaps most importantly, the stamens), thus distracting the viewer from the butterfly. I tried cropping it tight to get rid of the flower on the right, but that didn't help much. --Ebertakis (talk) 20:29, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
The name of the file and the title here is Fritillary feeding on passion flower. Passion flowers are the mainstay for the Fritillary. The passion flower is almost as much part of the subject as is the butterfly and is what distinguishes this image from most other images of the Fritillary as was intended, so I would say "distracting" is somewhat a subjective claim, as the color of the Fritillary easily distinguishes it from the flowers. However I could subdue the color a bit as it is perhaps a little on the 'rich' side. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:42, 21 October 2014 (UTC) -- (Done)
Added note : The color of the Fritillary in real life is practically a florescent orange, esp in sunlight, and the Passion Flowers are white, which are also in the sunlight. I could further subdue the 'harsh' light, but doing so would detract from the real life appearance. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:51, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm afraid the light quality cannot be improved by changing the colors. Think of the light "harshness" in terms of contrast: in this image, the camera sensor was overwhelmed by the brightness of the white flower petals and the darkness of the shadows, thus resulting in a high-contrast picture where all forms/patterns dominate the image. This is bad because taking the picture from above made the butterfly form overlap with the flower patterns, and the only thing that your eye has to go with is color. I tried to lighten up the shadows in the picture to make the light look more "even", but due to the high depth of field all I did was to bring up more patterns from the background (plant leaves) thus actually making the problem worse. You could get away with harsh light in a butterfly pic if you had a rather smooth background (example) or (my preferred alternative) if you took the picture from the side. Usually this brings background distractions far away (and out-of-focus) while keeping the butterfly and the flower both sharp. Also, you then get a round or flat flower next to the roughly triangular form of a butterfly and you therefore get two distinct and separated shapes in the photo with no overlap. Having said all that I would welcome any feedback from the more experienced photographers that frequent this page both on the picture and on my comments! --Ebertakis (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your insights and your willingness to be open to other comments. While what you've articulated is indeed food for thought I would only say that it is perhaps over emphasized in regards to this picture, which still has good composition and looks beautiful imo, while offering excellent detail of both Fritillary and Passion Flowers and also offers good scientific value, as it portrays butterfly anatomy, what it feeds on and how this is accomplished. I'm only hoping that any consideration of 'harsh' or less than perfect lighting isn't anything that will upstage all of these qualities. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:23, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - Difficult shot, but this has a distracting background and what appears to be posterization. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Re:Posterization. The underside of the wings of the Fritillary are very opaque, blotch-like and almost reflective in appearance, in real life. Is this what you're referring to? Re:Background. I could crop some of the background, esp the big leaf to the left. Would this help? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:16, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
That would help, but there is still too much DOF for the butterfly and chrysalis to really pop. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment - I like the photo, but the leaf is occupying nearly a third of the image, makes it a bit distracting... CarGT 23:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
@EuroCarGT: The leaf is a bit much I suppose. I could crop the leaf and upgrade the image, if this is permissible. Here is the upgraded image-- Would using this image involve a renomination?
@Crisco 1492: Not sure what you mean by 'DOF', I'm assuming you're referring to the background, which overall is not nearly as bright as the butterfly at center. I don't quite see the dim background, leaves, as anything distracting -- ie. just leaves and a faded piece of wood. See the cropped version. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 10:01, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
DOF = depth of field. If you compare this with, say, Jkadavoor's shots (another), the background is out of focus, allowing the butterfly to be in focus and the center of attention. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah, there's your problem. You'd want a camera that can adjust the depth of field, rather than trying to get everything sharp. I used a Canon PowerShot for 5 years before upgrading, and let me tell you, it's a lot easier to get better shots when you go with even an entry-level DSLR. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
When my budget allows I'll have to buy a more capable photo-box. The Fuji was my first camera years ago, it was dropped one too many times and now it's history. -- I just upgraded the nominated photo with a cropped version of this same image, assuming there are no policy or other issues here. Will revert and renominate if required. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
No problems with changing with an alt, AFAIK. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:02, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose - I hate to oppose this one because I like the moment, but the photo has noise and separation problems. The sharpness is not perfect either. --Ebertakis (talk) 20:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. A fine image. Bit blurry thoug in the foreground. Hafspajen (talk) 00:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Bearing in mind that the butterflies are in focus, yes, the branch in the foreground is slightly out of focus, then comes into focus where the butterflies are lighting, and then continues on slightly out of focus again and exists the picture at right, which imo gives the image depth and adds to the overall composition. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 09:10, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Nice but the BG needs a NR --Muhammad(talk) 11:27, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
In that case I turn into plain support. Hafspajen (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492 and Hafspajen: -- That would be great! Just so you know, I'm not using any special editing software on my end. i.e.I use Windows' Paint and also use XnView to handle sharpness, color saturation and hue when needed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Denoise supplied. Weak support as the DOF is a bit shallow, and the lower butterfly is somewhat OOF. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Support The lower butterfly is not entirely in focus, but the pair stands at an angle to the camera, which makes the shot very difficult to get 100% right. The, uh, intimate moment capture makes up for the unfortunate OOF problem, IMHO. --Ebertakis (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Weak support - per Crisco.--Godot13 (talk) 04:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. Very interesting and useful image. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2014 at 04:19:15 (UTC)
Original – Republic of Czechoslovakia, 10 korun, (1919, provisional issue). The first issue of paper currency.
High EV, High quality, rare. The brief 1919 provisional issue of Czechoslovakian banknotes (less than five months) used a 1915 Austro-Hungarian Bank issue as its base. Affixing an adhesive stamp equal to 1/100 the value of the note (i.e., 1 koruna = 100 haleru) to the left front side served as validation of legal tender status in the Republic of Czechoslovakia. Following currency reform, the first regular issue banknotes were printed with a date of 15 April 1919.
Support as nominator – Godot13 (talk) 04:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - Ooh, I like this one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment The uneven black space between the two notes is irritating my OCD ;) --Muhammad(talk) 11:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Muhammad- I hear you and I understand. In order to make sure that each side of the note has the best horizontal and vertical alignment, the margins do not always meet perfectly as these notes frequently had some small alignment errors. Sorry...--Godot13 (talk) 11:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support — Historically intriguing, partly for the language/minority issues that plagued this part of Europe for so long. Sca (talk) 14:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - why is the upper banknote written in Hungarian while the lower is in German? I know Hungarians say korona to Swedish kronas. Hafspajen (talk) 14:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
German and Hungarian were the two official languages of Austria-Hungary, which originally issued this banknote — and where seven or eight other languages were spoken. This is a temporary adaptation of an old A-H note by the newly formed Czechoslovak Republic (where Czech/Slovak and German were the main languages at the time). Sca (talk) 15:15, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Hm. Interesting that they cross used money like that. Like me paying with Swedish krona on Island, no problem. (Scandinavians). Hafspajen (talk) 18:11, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - I too noticed the uneven black lines but the historical importance and overall quality of the image have mooted that concern, especially with the explanation about the uneven cut. A fascinating photo of an era of transition. Jusdafax 21:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support - per Haf's question the note has the denomination in ten languages (2 main and 8 subsidiary)- Czech, Polish, Russian, Italian, Croat?, Slovene?, Bulgarian and Romanian. But not Serbian… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2014 at 12:16:33 (UTC)
Original – A first issue of the Kingdom of the Netherlands administration's gulden in the East Indies. This note, with a face value of one gulden, was issued in 1815. The text is in both Dutch and Jawi, for both the Dutch and indigene inhabitants of the Indies.
Another lovely scan of an old banknote from the Smithsonian, by our very own Godot13. This note, with a face value of one gulden, was issued in 1815. The text is in both Dutch and Jawi, for both the Dutch and indigene inhabitants of the Indies. Note that the obverse is blank, and is thus not included.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2014 at 19:27:16 (UTC)
The quality may not be perfect since it's a movie of about 100 years old but it is exceptionally high in terms of EV. Ravished Armenia, also known as Auction of Souls, is an American film based on the autobiographical book Ravished Armenia by Aurora Mardiganian, who also played the lead role in the film. The movie has been digitally remastered and provides a historical pretext to the Armenian Genocide and of the movie itself. This is a full length movie and is of great historical significance. Also, it appears the the movie is of better quality when played directly from commons. If there's a way we can align it with commons that'll be great.
Vote from sock puppet violating a block has been removed. ArmbrustHomunculus 01:32, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment - I believe Archive.org has a higher resolution version of this film. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
CommentCrisco 1492 (talk·contribs) I think it's the best format available. There are other formats available, however we need to keep in mind the 100 mb limit in Wikimedia Commons. Unless you can a good idea on picking out a better quality version. I'd love to here it. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
There have been ways around the 100mb limit for more than two years. The current limit is 1 gig, if you're using batched uploads. I've nominated several files of more than 100mb already. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Looking at this, I don't see how this can be PD. The captions are clearly not original to the film, and the score can't be either. The first two minutes is an explanatory crawl clearly written for the 2009 restoration. All of these can be copyrighted by the restorationist. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:35, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I disagree and this topic discussion must take place at commons. Étienne Dolet (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I never said it shouldn't, but the voters here have the right to know that there may be copyright issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose as a likely (though inadvertent) copyright violation. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2014 at 01:49:06 (UTC)
Original – Léal Souvenir (also known as Timotheus or Portrait of a Man) is a small 1432 oil on oak panel portrait by Early Netherlandish painter Jan van Eyck. The sitter has not been identified, but his individualistic features suggest that the portrait is based on a historical person rather than a hypothetical ideal, as was usual in northern European portraiture before van Eyck
High resolution, good scan, article is in good shape.
Comment It's a Yorck Project image, which puts me in "highly doubtful" territory to start: I haven't seen a Yorck Project scan yet that had decent colours. Adam Cuerden(talk) 03:11, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Where does it say that this version is a Yorck scan? Their travesty is at File:Jan van Eyck 092.jpg. This looks very similar, if not the same as, the NG's scan (see full resolution there), and the metadata includes the NG's copyright information. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2014 at 20:14:01 (UTC)
High quality, high EV. Cuban silver certificates were designed, engraved, and printed by the US Treasury’s Bureau of Engraving and Printing from 1934 to 1949. Illustrated below are the major design and approval points in the BEP production of Series 1936 Cuban paper currency. First produced and approved as artwork (see Series 1934), the design evolves into progress proofs with the addition of overprints (in this case the use of denomination-specific tints). When the certified proof (and any other overprints) are approved, the banknote moves into production. The Series 1936 progress proof is paired with the original artist proof reverse, as the back design remained the same for the duration of the printing. There has been no restoration whatsoever (other than cropping and adjusting color) as these are part of the BEP archive housed in the National Numismatic Collection. Each front and back image are separate, as all of these objects are uniface.
^The bottom selvage of BEP certified proofs contain the date of the proof impression and the necessary approval signatures to begin production of the basic plate printing (prior to the addition of any overprints containing color tints or seals and serial numbers).
^There were no changes in portraits or backs during the Silver certificate issue.
Support as nominator --Godot13 (talk) 20:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC) ...and last set nomination for the WikiCup...
Support - Strong set, interesting to have a Cuban import on the MP one day. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 20:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Support: These are beautiful and valuable. Thank you. Fylbecatuloustalk 14:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Well, this black - so I think it is a house rabbit or Domestic rabbit (black rabbits are not usual in the wild... - or possibly a melanistic varierty ...? but still interesting than ) - Oryctolagus cuniculus is Latin for European rabbit - the one in FP the picture is wild. The only rabbit to be widely domesticated is the European rabbit, which has been extensively domesticated for food or as a pet. It was first widely kept in ancient Rome and was refined into a wider variety of breeds during the Middle AgesHafspajen (talk) 16:40, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Diego's identified it as O. cuniculus, which is a species name. Being domesticated or not does not affect that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Same species is not a problem as far as the use in article is different. For domesticated animals, we can expect more sub divisions (See the categorization in Commons). I agree, Rabbit is a too wide scope. Wonder why an Australian rabbit is used at European rabbit too. Jee 08:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Blast this rabbit, because it is same species - the Australians never had a rabbit before the Europeans took them there. Hafspajen (talk) 13:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Still my biology-lesson say to me that oryctolagus-cuniculus-forma-domestica is very different from Oryctolagus cuniculus - out in the wild -wild ones are grey-brownish - while domestic ones are black, white, blue, cinnamon - and so on. Hafspajen (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Still I don't think a rabbit grown up in Australia is the best option to describe a rabbit "native to southwestern Europe (Spain and Portugal) and northwest Africa (Morocco and Algeria)". :) Jee 14:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Eh, no, not that one. These rabbits are annoying. Hafspajen (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment. Nice picture, but I feel that the lighting lets it down just slightly. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492, Hafspajen, and Jkadavoor: The image quality of this image is better than the one Crisco mentioned. For example this image is 3115×2920 pixels whereas the one Crisco mentioned is 1367×1709 pixels. The light and focus is more sharp in this image than the one Crisco mentioned. Thanks! ter 09:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Hm, actually it is. Only 1367×1709 pixels. Hafspajen (talk) 14:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Said image is also five years old. Note that size isn't everything, however. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2014 at 23:23:33 (UTC)
"I am no longer an artist interested and curious, I am a messenger who will bring back word from the men who are fighting to those who want the war to go on for ever. Feeble, inarticulate, will be my message, but it will have a bitter truth, and may it burn their lousy souls." Paul Nash
^Paul Nash (1949). Outline : an autobiography and other writings. Faber and Faber, London. pp. 1–271, p.211.
Paul Nash artwork from the World War One are among the most iconic images of the conflict. After the war Nash continued to focus on landscape painting, originally in a formalized, decorative style but, throughout the 1930s, in an increasingly abstract and surreal manner.
Add here, as a possible set. IKt that case BOTH should be FP. Original sketch is different and stands well even on its own right.