Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 23 2019

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Mercedes-Benz_O403,_Sabir_(P1090295).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Two Mercedes-Benz O403 coaches in Azerbaijan --MB-one 14:18, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support
    Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 06:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
    Would you please crop the lower left shadow? --Cvmontuy 13:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
    ✓ Done --MB-one 20:28, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:24, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Parliament_at_Sunset.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination The Palace of Westminster in London, the meeting place of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. By User:Mgimelfarb --大诺史 17:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  SupportGood quality. --Seven Pandas 19:31, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not clear enough with the zoom, sorry --Billy69150 23:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Looks great at the first glance, wonderful light, but if I view it at full size the quality is just not there, sorry. --Aristeas 09:33, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Increasing unsharpness to the left side, noise, WB looks unnatural. Good composition and lighting, but that is not enough, sorry. -- Smial 09:53, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:22, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Parc_Poncet_Marcigny_août_2019_7.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination A tree in Georges-Poncet Park of Marcigny, Saône-et-Loire, Marcigny. --Chabe01 23:23, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 05:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Main theme is unknown (tree, Cedrus, species unidentified). --Kenraiz 12:33, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment: The species has nothing to do with image quality. --Manfred Kuzel 04:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • It has everything to do with image quality in terms of meeting the QI criteria. Please see "image page requirements" in the Guidelines: "images should have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages." As this image is neither very well titled, categorized nor has an accurate description of the subject, there is every reason to oppose. I also find that the image doesn't have good technical quality (mobile phones are often unable to give us high enough detail and sharpness), so I am going to  Oppose.--Peulle 07:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support The technical quality is imho surprisingly good. The tree looks like a young Cedrus atlantica. I hope, we can get a better guess by a real expert. But overall, if you describe the image as "Young cedar at Parc Poncet Marcigny" it should be a good description. Greetings --Dirtsc 09:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Somewhat soft, and the sky is overprocessed, has strong posterisation/banding. -- Smial (talk)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_de_San_Luis,_Múnich,_Alemania,_2012-04-30,_DD_04.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Church of St. Ludwig, Munich, Germany --Poco a poco 09:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. Unsharp and overexposed. --Seven Pandas 18:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Sharp enough IMO. Perhaps a bit too bright. --Ermell 21:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Good photo, but overexposed. --Manfred Kuzel 06:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment ✓ Exposure reduced Poco a poco 20:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Now it's better. Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 05:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
    Manfred Kuzel: you're voting twice Poco a poco 17:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
    Poco a poco: I see, but how do I remove the first voting? --Manfred Kuzel 07:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
    Manfred Kuzel: Like I did above, Poco a poco 18:59, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
    Thank you, Poco a poco. --Manfred Kuzel 04:03, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support good now. --Smial 10:19, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Good now. --Aristeas 15:32, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:20, 22 August 2019 (UTC)