Wikipedia:Picture peer review

Picture peer review was a staging area for potential Featured Picture Candidates (FPCs).

This review was a useful "spot check" before making a formal FPC nomination – a working area where you can get some creative feedback, request help with useful pictures that might need minor editing, or advice with finding the best article that they illustrate – giving that nomination its best possible chance of promotion.

Note: "peer review" usually implies a group of authoritative reviewers who are equally familiar with and expert in the subject. The process represented by this page is not a formal academic peer review in that sense. Images that undergo this process cannot be assumed to have greater authority than any other.

For general advice on editing pictures prior to uploading, see Wikipedia:How to improve image quality.

For the specific criteria against which FPCs are judged, see Wikipedia:What is a featured picture?

To see recent changes, purge the page cache

Shortcut

WP:PPR

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Suggestions for FPC and VPC

Valverde pitching motion

**Original** - The pitching motion of José Valverde

I've never gone through this process before, so forgive me if this is a terrible image. I figure there's probably a better way to crop and arrange the photos at least.

Articles this image appears in: José Valverde

Creator: Arbitrarily0 (talk · contribs)

Suggested by: Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

VPC for sure. Pretty useful to the subject, but FPC is very rough on athlete photos and this one doesn't have nearly enough focus on him or an optimal enough angle. --I'ḏ ♥One 06:26, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with IdLoveOne. This could be an FP with some small differences: 1) taken from the other side of the field would be more optimal (to see the front of the pitcher) 2) remove much of the unnecessary space around the pitcher (crop) 3) quality is pretty much there, but there is a bit of chromatic aberration and blown highlights. Jujutacular ^talk 21:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

1900 republican campaign poster

**Original** - 1900 Campaign poster for the Republican Party with the motto "The American flag has not been planted in foreign soil to acquire more territory but for humanity's sake."

Good quality and Good EV

Articles this image appears in: Spanish–American War, American imperialism, Cuba – United States relations

Creator: Rjensen

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 20:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Seconder

Indian Roller

Nice shot, looks fairly educational.

Articles this image appears in: Indian Roller

Creator: J.M.Garg

Suggested by: ℳono 05:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

It looks sickly and hurt? See File:Bird 8087918.jpg and File:Coracias benghalensis.jpg. We wouldn't promote something that isn't representative of a healthy specimen, unless your trying to illustrate a notable disease they get? — raeky T 05:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well. Too bad. A quick Bing shows nothing relating to disease. ℳono 06:15, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too small for FPC. Needs to be at least 1000px on one side. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

The Columbia Supercomputer

Interesting subject, but I'm not sure it's quality is high enough. Thoughts?

Articles this image appears in: Supercomputer, Columbia (supercomputer), NASA Advanced Supercomputing Division, Computer, NASA Research and Engineering Network

Creator: NASA, uploaded by Epolk

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 19:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Don't think the fisheye lens in this case is good for the EV, and we have better images of supercomputers, see File:EarthSimulator.jpg File:Kraken_photo.jpg and File:JaguarXT5.jpg and maybe more at commons:Category:Supercomputers — raeky T 05:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about the lens. This type of shot is nice, though, because you get a better sense of what the computers look like. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:33, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

John Edmund "Jack" Fries

**Original** - Jack Fries, suited up for the 1908 Carroll College yearbook photo

Found this picture in an old 1908 college yearbook (therefore is in public domain). I think it just captures the "attitude and spirit" of the times

Articles this image appears in: John Edmund Fries

Creator: Paulmcdonald

Suggested by: Paul McDonald (talk) 13:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Source link is broken. Image is very small. If a better scan could be obtained, this might have a chance. Makeemlighter (talk) 15:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

William Holman Hunt's "The Scapegoat"

Somebody should nominate this at FPC I think, unless someone can point out some disqualifying flaws I failed to notice. The painting is pretty well-known and we have a good size and quality digital version of it that is already featured on Commons. I'm not doing it because I always thought that, while good, it's kind of creepy. Taker? Comment? See any flaws?

Articles this image appears in: Goat, William Holman Hunt, Scapegoating, The Scapegoat (painting)

Creator: William Holman Hunt, uploaded by Dmitry Rozhkov

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 02:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

First off the practice it's depicting is horrid torture of an animal, imho. Second, the author doesn't appear to be notable, but as far as I can tell the painting fails WP:GNG so it's page is probably a deletion candidate, imho. The two references are certainty not enough to pass WP:GNG I'm sure. The digitization of the painting seems to be sufficient, but it doesn't appear, at least to me, to be a very impressive painting. The hills in the background look far to simplistic and basic, and same with the skeleton in the foreground. Doesn't strike me as a anywhere near as detailed as some of his other works. I would have to oppose on EV grounds. — raeky T 03:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, so I'm not the only one who agrees the image is creepy, though it's mostly the colors and peculiarly located goat that freaks me out. Like it or not, scapegoating is very historical, Biblical even, and like most things Biblical its pretty irrational and a silly and horrific way to misplace responsibility for what was then considered 'sinful,' I suspect Hunt agrees since he made it such an evil-seeming illustration, but I think this is one of his best known and most notable paintings actually, it can be found on Google. --I'ḏ♥One 03:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Is there significant coverage in reliable third party sources about this specific painting? — raeky T 03:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ok, apparently the goat is meant to represent Jesus and it was painted when Hunt was quite well-known.[1][2] --I'ḏ♥One 04:13, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Umm.. reference.com just uses wikipedia data, if you note it's a carbon copy and even says where it came from... The article definitely needs help. — raeky T 04:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's meant to be creepy. It's a picture of a goat dying of thirst, painted from life by Hunt who actually took a real goat to the Dead Sea and starved it to death. It came as a surprise to art dealer Ernst Gambart, who remarked after Hunt had presented it to him that "I wanted a nice religious picture and he painted me a great goat.". As Richard J. Lane notes, it's the "moral duty" of this picture to be "basically repulsive and unpleasant to look at", since the message of an innocent creature suffering for one's iniquities is the very message that it is intended to convey. If you find it creepy, then you are following in the footsteps of many who have gone before. If you want an FPC vote from notable art critics, here are two. First a vote from William Michael Rossetti:

“

With the public I fear that it will be all but a failure, and certainly a theme for no little ridicule; […]

”

— W.M.Rosetti 1856, as cited in The Scapegoat (painting)

And second a vote from his brother, Dante Gabriel Rossetti:

“

A grand thing, but not for the public

”

— Dante Gabriel Rosetti. "Letter to William Allingham (1856-04)". In Oswald Doughty and John Robert Wahl (ed.). Letters of Dante Gabriel Rossetti: 1835–1860. Vol. 1. Clarendon Press.

There you go. Victorian sensibilities on whether this picture should be featured to the public. Ignore those silly modern national museums choosing this as picture of the month. Ignore those modern art critics who think this to be "great art" and "intoxicating Victorian folly". What would Waldemar Januszczak know about it? Go with the Victorians! ☺ Uncle G (talk) 13:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to disagree with Raeky, I think this is a fantastic painting. However, the opinions of myself and Raeky on the painting itself don't really matter- it appears, from the article on the painting, to be very notable (not quite sure what Raeky's objection is, unless I'm missing something). We have the whole picture, the dimensions are right, the colours seem right. This'd be a strong support from me, apart from the fact the colours seem to be wrong. J Milburn (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

SEM Zoom

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Picture_peer_review/SEM_Zoom&action=edit&section=T-1

Original - A video illustrating a typical practical magnification range of a scanning electron microscope designed for biological specimens. The video starts at 25x, about 6 mm across the whole field of view, and zooms in to 12000x, about 12 μm across the whole field of view. The spherical objects are glass beads with a diameter of 10 μm, similar in diameter to a red blood cell.

An impressive demonstration of a central tool in modern microscopy.

Articles this image appears in: scanning electron microscope

Creator: Richard Wheeler (Zephyris)

Suggested by: - Zephyris _Talk 00:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Note that there are some technical issues with this video, does anyone think they are serious issues?
- This was generated from a series of 10 images at different magnifications which do not stitch perfectly together because of sample drift etc.
- Some parts of the sample jumped during scanning giving some cut off beads (one of these is visible in the default video thumbnail).
I would have to support this just because it's super way up my ally, I love SEM's. Hope to get access to another again someday. ;-) I don't think the flaws are distracting enough to warrant opposes on them, imho. The 720p size is wonderful as well, although I would suggest making and uploading a 480p and maybe a smaller version as well for linking in articles. 17 megs for 18 seconds of video is probably beyond what some of our low-bandwidth/dial-up readers would want to view. Look at the size options provided for the recently promoted NASA video. Only things that if someone is super picky about is that the article talks about SEM's going as far as 500,000x and this stops at 12,000x, also the choice of subject of calibration beads is not as visually interesting as say an insect or something else. Other then that it's a wonderful concept and I think of great value. I'd support it for a FP. — raeky T 03:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your comments! The article's 500000x magnification refers to tha instruments maximum, practically for a sputter coated biological sample you will see no more useful information at magnifications above ~20000x... I should probably add that to the SEM article. I hope I do get a chance to capture a more interesting subject in a similar way at some point :) - Zephyris _Talk 07:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Could you get hold of some pollen grains? Zooming in on something like this would be more interesting than glass beads. Palynology doesn't seem to be a particularly active area, but somebody in Oxford might be able to help. Smartse (talk) 21:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion the technical deficiencies detract from this video. There is no scale bar in any of the images, the zoom frame starts with half specimen/half tape, even the edge of the tape is showing in the lower right, there is obvious charging streaking the image at the higher mags, the particles are poorly dispersed on the tape. There are some great SEM images on wikipedia, but there are also some of very poor technical quality that have been promoted to featured images. Featured images requires good technical quality at the least, this should hold for micrographs as well as photographs. --KMLP (talk) 23:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Elements, Minerals and Ores

Copper

Amethyst

Albite

Aragonite

Pyrite

I like all of these and think they could make FP and all of them are either featured on Commons or a different language Wiki, but I'm not sure, does anyone think they might have artefacts or that the edges against the background might be too harsh to pass?

Articles this image appears in: Can we just say "a lot"?

Creator: Digon3

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 18:33, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Copper We have File:Cu-Scheibe.JPG as a FP for Copper, which is an Element and the image is not used on the element's page. That rules it out. — raeky T 03:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Amethyst Not used on Amethyst and we have File:Amethyst. Magaliesburg, South Africa.jpg as our FP for Amethyst, again, image not used on it or Quartz which has this FP File:Quartz, Tibet.jpg. So we could probably rule that one out too. — raeky T 03:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Albite Image appears to be quite heavily digitally manipulated, some pretty obvious cutout artifacts along the bottom and reflection is probably fake, also the sample isn't really that impressive, so I think that would probably fail too. — raeky T 03:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Aragonite Not used on Aragonite or anywhere else, and we seem to have some pretty good images on Aragonite already.. so thats probably ruled out. — raeky T 03:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pyrite Not used on Pyrite or anywhere else really, and we have an excellent FP of Pyrite already, File:Pyrite from Ampliación a Victoria Mine, Navajún, La Rioja, Spain 2.jpg, as you can see the sample isn't that impressive compared to the one in our existing FP. — raeky T 03:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Metallic chess pieces

**Original** - External to internal: Rooks, Bishops, and a King and Queen (unsure which is which)

I think it has great eye-appeal for FP and looks beautiful as the lead image on the chess page, but it's not used right now and the background looks like a piece of paper with some crumples.. Does it need anything done?

Articles this image appears in: None yet

Creator: Photograph taken by Glenn McKechnie

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 07:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Doesn't look like the editors like that picture, which is probably a sign. It's not a very typical chess pieces, seems to be hand crafted, fairly low quality photograph, blown highlights... I like the current lead image on Chess, the black & white pieces is what everyone associates with chess, not a stylistic steel chess pieces. — raeky T 03:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No, no, I only added it briefly and reverted it for demonstration. The lighting doesn't seem too blown out to me, and I was thinking the same thing that it's good to have one that shows both color pieces since that's a major aspect of the game. --I'ḏ ♥One 07:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Raeky here. J Milburn (talk) 13:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

An elephant

Well, it's a decent size and angle, but not sure about the resolution. I think it could maybe make VP?

Articles this image appears in: African Bush Elephant · Megafauna · Paenungulata

Creator: nickandmel2006 on Flickr

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 04:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Sadly this was taken with a 2006 5mp point-and-shoot camera, and it shows. There is very little detail in the photograph and the colors are very dull. I couldn't support this for a FP. It's current usage as the lead image on multiple relevant pages, even general Elephant and Paenungulata, means it'd probably be a shoe-in for VP, I'd support it there. — raeky T 03:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A very dynamic image and I love the green background too. However the cut off left ear is the main flaw and technical quality is very low. --Ikiwaner (talk) 18:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

French Press Set

Thought this might make it through VP, but not sure if it's worth nominating.

Articles this image appears in: French press

Creator: Yongbin

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 09:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The last glass is half cropped. --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, you can see the top half reflected in the French press... =\ --I'ḏ ♥One 00:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This image doesn't tell me anything about how this is used, File:French press cafetiere with coffee on Coffee Right in Brno, Czech Republic.jpg I think is a far more EV image of a French press, and it's even potentially good enough for a FP, maybe. — raeky T 03:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Four Kingfishers

Image 1 - Yellow-billed Kingfisher (Syma torotoro)

Image 2 - A male Blue-winged Kookabura at the Cotswold Wildlife Park, Oxfordshire, England.

Image 3 - Kingfisher with a frog for its meal

Image 4 - Brown-headed Paradise-kingfisher.

Good images, wondering if anyone else thinks they could make VP at least.

Articles this image appears in: Kookaburra, Kingfisher

Creator: Richard Taylor on Flickr

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 08:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

#1 -- The colors seem dull, could use some levels adjustment. Not big enough or detailed enough I don't think for a FP. A VP is a maybe if it gets some graphic labs help to brighten up the colors. — raeky T 03:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
#2 -- These birds scare the willies out of me, like File:Bluewingedadelzoo.JPG that angle. Being shot in a zoo with a very artificial background would rule this out at FP, plus it's not up to par with recent bird FP's we've promoted. Not sure about VP, possibly... — raeky T 03:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It they freak you out it's probably my fault for arraigning them like this. >=) --I'ḏ ♥One 18:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
#3 -- We recently passed File:Dacelo novaeguineae waterworks.jpg, therefore that rules out #3. — raeky T 03:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
#4 -- Interesting picture, not sure if the original would do it or not, but at this scaled down size it just wouldn't pass FP.. VP again is a maybe. — raeky T 03:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

The Game

This image captures the essence of the game.

Articles this image appears in: The Game (mind game)

Creator: Paulyg143

Suggested by: Paulyg143 (talk) 08:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Thanks, I just lost. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Way too low of a resolution to be even considered as a FP or VP. Its addition to the article in question was contentious and thus (as of right now) its encyclopedic merits are in question. Its caption was not 'succinct' and referenced another Internet meme in the process. As of right now, this picture would likely fail a FPN/VPN per WP:SNOW. elektrik SHOOS 10:03, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's also a derivative work, thus copyright violation. — raeky T 12:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion

Image deleted. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane skyline

Very nice and educational picture

Articles this image appears in: Brisbane, Queensland, List of tallest buildings in Brisbane

Creator: Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre

Suggested by: Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 01:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

small, blown out sky... wouldn't pass either based on that IMHO. — raeky T 02:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion

Current VPC candidate. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eubrachyura

**Original** - Vernal crab from the Belgian coastal waters on board of RV Belgica.

Great EV and Great resolution

Articles this image appears in: Crab, Liocarcinus vernalis, Eubrachyura

Creator: Lycaon

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 17:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I thought about thinking about nominating this in FPC, not sure I would because of some lighting issues in this on the ridges and the colors might be duller than they should be but I'm not sure. Stylistically the specimen on a black background is more often than not popular on FPC, but I think I'd just take it to VPC. --I'ḏ ♥One 09:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Felicia Day headshot

**Original** - Felicia Day is an American actress known for her work on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog and the web series The Guild.

A rather high quality portrait, released by Felicia Day to us. Non-standard composition, makes it more compelling (that and well... it's Felicia Day!).

Articles this image appears in: Felicia Day

Creator: Felicia Day

Suggested by: — raeky T 01:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Good, but the lighting is kind of cold, though her teeth and eyes look nice in it, and someone might say there's not enough head room. If I were voting I might offer at least a weak support. --I'ḏ♥One 09:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't need head room when you do a non-standard composition, thats the point. ;-) — raeky T 12:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd absolutely love to support this, but, sadly, I doubt it was created by Felicia Day. I think we'd really need to know who created it- no doubt a professional photographer under her employ. We may even need a statement of release from them. J Milburn (talk) 13:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, if you zoom in to the reflection in her eyeball, there is no cameraperson, just a camera on a tripod. What's the point of this page, anyway? --Surturz (talk) 00:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Illinois Central Railroad freight terminal

Interesting view of old Chicago, high resolution

Articles this image appears in: Grant Park (Chicago), Millennium Park, One Prudential Plaza

Creator: Jack Delano

Suggested by: — raeky T 22:18, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Seconder

39 Welsh Row, Nantwich

**Original** - 39 Welsh Row, formely a savings bank, is now a ployment agency

The picture has good EV and has nice resolution.

Articles this image appears in: Jacobethan, 39 Welsh Row, Nantwich

Creator: Espresso Addict

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 04:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

To small for FP, VP is possible I think... — raeky T 04:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Alitta succinea

I've just created the two articles in which this appears, but now I'm not certain whether it is worth nominating, and I know my judgement's been a little off in the last few days. Worth nominating for FP?

Articles this image appears in: Alitta succinea, Alitta

Creator: Hans Hillewaert

Suggested by: J Milburn (talk) 16:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

You've already nominated a better picture... remember File:Nereis succinea (epitoke).jpg.... Nereis succinea is a synonym for Alitta succinea, thus the same organism. — raeky T 17:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- DAMN. That's a real trout moment. Well spotted... I think I should hand this over to someone who knows more about this sort of thing than me. J Milburn (talk) 17:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Note that the colour balance on this image is quite similar to the modification I made to the one currently nominated as a featured picture... - Zephyris _Talk 17:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yup, feel free to mention it in the nom. In other news, I've dealt with this now, so feel free to close this. :) J Milburn (talk) 17:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Gouache paintings, related and Zorn

Image 1 - Självporträtt av Anders Zorn's self portrait, 1896

Image 2 - A paint set with gouache paint, brushes and palette. Gouache is water-based, but uses larger particles of pigment that remain suspended in the medium, which is also demonstrated by the cleaning water to the right.

Image 3 - Sold for 26 million SEK, Sweden's priciest painting ever

All HQ, all have EV, Image 2 is perhaps one of the best showcasing the medium itself.

Articles this image appears in: Image 1: Oil painting · Anders Zorn · Self-portrait. Image 2: Gouache · Gum arabic Image 3: Anders Zorn

Creator: Image 1: Anders Zorn, uploaded by Thuresson, Image 2: Jeff Dahl, Image 3: Anders Zorn, this version uploaded by user:AlphaZeta and previously by Nicke L

Suggested by: I'ḏ ♥One 23:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Not sure what this is, you trying to do a set, or each individually? — raeky T 04:33, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It was just easier (by some definition of the word, or had seemed to be anyway at some point) than creating a PPR page for each of them =\ --I'ḏ♥One 15:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's no problem, just wasn't sure what was going on. I'll look at all 3 here in a bit and give you my thoughts. — raeky T 19:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Självporträtt av Anders Zorn 1896.jpg, the image history shows another version, facing another way and drastically different colors, which is right? Plus I think the picture is overall too small to be a FP, VP is a maybe provided you could clear up if this is the correct orientation and color. — raeky T 19:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- According to these reproducers[3] this version is the right direction, but this might just be that same one. --I'ḏ ♥One 20:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Gouache.jpg seems to posed and EV is questionable, not something I'd think of as representative of the painting style, not sure what use it is? — raeky T 20:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I just thought it was a very good example of the medium itself instead of something created from it... --I'ḏ ♥One 09:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Sommarnöje (1886), akvarell av Anders Zorn.jpg again significantly different colors in the two versions in the history, plus just doesn't seem big enough for a FP nomination, and EV is less than the self-portrait. Is this painter well known for this style of painting, as in is there many references that cite him as an example of this style? — raeky T 20:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not sure I agree that it's not big enough, but he's got a whole museum to dedicated to him[4] so I guess to some serious art enthusiasts he's kind of a big deal. I don't know much about him, but I think he was pretty talented, the water is very impressive and I thought this painting was as well. --I'ḏ ♥One 20:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You could give #3 a try at FPC to see what others think, not sure on #1, and #2 is probably no chance. — raeky T 00:16, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Queen Mary II

**Original** - The RMS Queen Mary 2, seen from off her port bow.

The picture has High EV and was a selected picture at Portal:Transport.

Articles this image appears in: Cunard Line, Port (nautical), Ocean liner, Passenger ship, RMS Queen Mary 2

Creator: Chris190572

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 17:06, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

A bit out of focus, the weather's not ideal, it seems to have been taken around twilight and I know at FPC someone would have a problem with that tugboat, but otherwise great angle and capture of the entire side of the ship and with good room around it. ..Might pass at VP? --I'ḏ ♥One 00:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Lakeview in Western Ghats

File:Nature in the lake.JPG

Original - Beautiful Scenery at a lake in Western Ghats. Taken By Nikon D50

Very Nice picture.

Articles this image appears in: Western Ghats

Creator: Tatiraju.rishabh

Suggested by: Tatiraju.rishabh (talk) 13:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Colors seem to be off, also not clear enough EV for FP or VP. — raeky T 23:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Western Ghats

File:Western Ghats.JPG

Original - View of Western ghats near Pune, India. Very nice picture

Very nice picture.

Articles this image appears in: Western Ghats

Creator: Tatiraju.rishabh

Suggested by: Tatiraju.rishabh (talk) 17:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Not detailed enough and not clear enough EV for a FP or VP. Sorry. — raeky T 23:18, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Wakatobi beach

Amazing resolution, high EV in Wakatobi National Park and was a featured picture in Portal:Indonesia.

Articles this image appears in: Wakatobi National Park, List of national parks of Indonesia

Creator: ~~Elekhh~~ FlickrUser:Jenny from Taipei

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 18:15, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

FPC is out of the question, the boat is blown out, very bad loss of detail at full resolution, looks to have had contrast or some other metric overtly tweeked and too compressed. Not sure about a VPC... — raeky T 20:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed creator. --jjron (talk) 19:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I wish I was there though ;). --Elekhh (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Darian Durant

I think this image illustrates the subject well, and I would also appreciate the feedback for future reference.

Articles this image appears in: Darian Durant

Creator: Canada Hky

Suggested by: Canada Hky (talk) 03:51, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Doesn't have the sharpness for a FPC, but a VPC is possible. — raeky T 20:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the input! I will have to wait a bit to hit the 1-month time for VPC, but I appreciate your opinion, and that you took the time to check it out. Canada Hky (talk) 21:12, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Navy Pier

Great EV and resolution.

Articles this image appears in: Chicago, Navy Pier, National Register of Historic Places listings in Chicago

Creator: Magnus Manske

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 18:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Shame, it's a good angle for the pier, but the overcast rules it out for a FPC, and might be an issue for a VPC. — raeky T 20:40, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced this is the best angle for this shot. Something like or seems better to me, although it would have to be a heck of a shot to have the requisite detail. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a very important angle due to the visibility of the Navy Pier sign. Ping me if you nom it at VPC. I am likely to support.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:25, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah...too bad about the overcast issue. Had I known this was a candidate for FPC or VPC I would've taken one on a nicer day...too bad I don't live there anymore. =( Banpei (talk) 07:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Delgadillo's Snow Cap Drive-In

Good EV and nice quality.

Articles this image appears in: U.S. Route 66, Seligman, Arizona, Delgadillo's Snow Cap Drive-In

Creator: PMDrive1061

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 17:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

This is a modern picture of a business that's still in business, it's quality and composition doesn't strike me as anything special, a better image could be taken to replace this, maybe one not on an overcast day, or from a better angle or view. — raeky T 22:00, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Bumblebee On Lavendar

**Original** - A bumblebee on a stem of lavendar

A detailed picture of a Danish bumblebee on a popular plant of theirs - lavendar.

Articles this image appears in: no articles yet, but will be in the bumblebee article if the feedback is good enough.

Creator: TobiasKierk

Suggested by: TobiasKierk (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

We have very high standards when it comes to insect featured pictures, see Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Animals/Insects, there is focus issues here, size, lighting and some weird hair thats distracting. Don't see this passing FPC or VPC, sorry. — raeky T 22:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- To add, I'm not sure Bumblebee needs any additional pictures, I don't see where this picture is specifically better then any of the others as a replacement or that it adds something not already covered by one of the other pictures. Sorry. — raeky T 22:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I agree that the hair are a bit distracting. I will try to remove them. However, I don't see any light, size or focus issues. The size is like many other pictures (including featured) on wikipedia. Regarding the Bumblebee article, this picture has some serious focus and size problems: . I've added my picture to the Lavender article, where it suits pretty well. TobiasKierk (talk) 23:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yea lavender does need some more pictures, I donno, it could replace the linked image, you can either be WP:BOLD and do it, or ask on the talk page for other editors of that article's opinion. — raeky T 01:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Trube Castle, Galveston

**Original** - Trube Castle, one of the many historic structures that have been preserved in the city of Galveston, Texas

Good quality with a fairly good amount of EV.

Articles this image appears in: Galveston, Texas, Free State of Galveston

Creator: Magnus Manske

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 21:57, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Marginal EV for the articles, size concerns, lighting appears to be overly harsh, focus concerns, power lines should be cloned out since they're distracting, wouldn't really have a chance at either FPC or VPC, imho. If there was a Trube Castle then VPC is probably doable, but it's just not enough EV in Galveston, Texas or Free State of Galveston for it. — raeky T 18:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that the lighting is too harsh, I think this is a good and nice-looking photo and that many others at FPC would agree about that. But I do agree that I don't see the EV for the image, is it of any historical significance? Also, you'd most like get at least one oppose for the size, even though it meets the current rule that it have a dimension over 1000px some voters insist on HUGE photos only. --I'ḏ ♥One 00:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Tulsa Skyline

**Original** - The skyline of Tulsa, which is the second largest city in Oklahoma and 47th-largest in the United States.

The picture is of great quality and resolution, is of important EV, and is a selected picture in Portal:Oklahoma.

Articles this image appears in: Tulsa, Oklahoma, Oklahoma, History of Tulsa, Oklahoma, List of tallest buildings in Tulsa

Creator: CPacker

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 21:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Theres to much focus in the picture on the park and not the skyline imho, also for skylines the precedent is usually for panorama's now a days. — raeky T 21:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

American Cowboy in 1872

File:Cowboy 1872.jpg

Original - The cowboy, the quintessential symbol of the American Old West, circa 1872

It's a good, valuable picture of the American Old West that's in great resolution.

Articles this image appears in: Oklahoma, ~~Cowboy~~, Western United States, American Old West, Frontier Strip, 19th century in the United States, ~~Western riding~~

Creator: Grabill, John C. H

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 17:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

This particular version I don't think would stand a chance at FP, although a high-quality restoration of the original may. — raeky T 17:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about VP? Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 21:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After seeing the original with all the room around it, i'd oppose it because it's too tightly cropped and doesn't follow any rules like lead room and rule of thirds. It has the EV part down though, pretty good EV for Cowboy and Western riding, the other articles I wouldn't focus on since it has very little EV in. — raeky T 21:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

**Edit 1** - I replaced the orginial with one with more space. It currently appears in Western riding and Cowboy.

I added an Edit 1 with solves some issues with the prevoious one and I slashed out "western riding" and "cowboy" because that's where edit 1 appears in now. Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 21:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The original doesn't follow the rules I listed, and the two articles you slashed out are the ones with the most EV in it.. the other edit isn't ideal either. — raeky T 21:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glass Mounatins, Oklahoma

**Original** - Mesas in the Glass Mountains of western Oklahoma.

It's a great picture of a piece of Oklahoma's landscape at great resolution. it's also a selected pictire on Portal:United States and Portal:Oklahoma.

Articles this image appears in: Oklahoma, Mesa, Glass Mountains, Northwestern Oklahoma, Geography of Oklahoma

Creator: Nmajdan

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 03:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Doesn't seem to have a sharp focus and the road on the left is distracting, unlikely pass FPC or VPC. — raeky T 13:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Snowy Egret

I think the picture has pretty high EV, showing the bird in a natural pose, exhibiting the common field marks (egret shape, white, with black legs and yellow "boots". It's high res, and sharp detail. I might have moved it straight to FP nominations, but I wanted a second opinion. I uploaded this pic to replace the one formerly listed, which I think had lower EV. Nevertheless, I don't want to seem utterly self-promoting here - hoping to get an objective eye or two involved. See Talk:Snowy Egret for details about the swap.

Articles this image appears in: Snowy Egret

Creator: Johnath

Suggested by: Johnath (talk) 02:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Probably doesn't have a chance, appears to have some seriously blown out highlights along the top of the bird. — raeky T 02:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, this was part of my concern, too - the blown highlights aren't masking important details, but they do detract from the technical quality somewhat.--Johnath (talk) 02:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Blown highlights like this might be forgiven for a WP:VPC but is pretty much impossible to get through a WP:FPC. — raeky T 02:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - This is why you should shoot RAW - highlight recovery would be easy. The head of the egret also seems to be out of focus. Hopefully it isn't too difficult to try again. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - FWIW, I do shoot RAW. Recovery still leaves this patchy though. Alas! --Johnath (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Ross Barnett Reservoir Sunset

**Original** - Sun setting on the Ross Barnett Reservoir in Mississippi

I took this photograph. I live right next to the lake and often get to see really awesome sunsets. I'm curious what others think of this picture, and any suggestions on how I can take better photographs of sunsets.

Articles this image appears in: Ross Barnett Reservoir

Creator: the creator of the image, where possible using the format The Eskimo

Suggested by: The Eskimo (talk) 21:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Undeniably beautiful, but I don't think it the image teaches much about the reservoir except the obvious: That it has a lot of water in it. If you'd managed to get an over shot, like from a small plane or a satellite (hint: Perhaps GoogleMaps/GoogleEarth), that would probably pass at FPC, but I might support this at VPC. --I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 23:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not upload from GoogleMaps/GoogleEarth, their satellite images are under copyright. Jujutacular ^T · C 18:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Figures, but the point about an aerial shot of a reservoir standing a better chance at FPC and being more educational then a sunset photo still stands, pretty though it may be. Still, some people might give it credit for being the lead image. From this angle you can't see how big it is, and it's big, bigger than a nearby town or two, an airport and something called a "wildlife management area" combined, though all of them are kind of small so it's all in perspective, but it's still 16 miles long. Maybe this can help. --I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 19:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I guess could you try it at FPC if you want to, if it fails, it fails, but there might be some willing to vote in favor of it on its beauty, meeting size qualifications and connection to the article. This is public domain made from a NASA software. This got featured, but notice that it's larger than yours; I don't really agree with it but FPC tends to favor larger images. --I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 23:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to tell you how to live your life or what you should or shouldn't regard as private information, but can I suggest that you take your home address off the image page of this - it's usually not good to advertise that type of thing. Geocoding it would be a better option. --jjron (talk) 14:25, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

African Masks and Sculptures

Image 1 - A wooden mask made by the Punu tribe in Gabon

Image 2 - A 30 cm ebony sculpture.

Image 3 - Fang mask used for the Ngil ceremony. Wood, Gabon, 19th century.

Image 4 - Mask, Urhobo peoples, Nigeria, Early to mid-20th century.

All of these are in better than usual quality, are prominently used in their articles, have obvious EV to them and are beautiful and obviously made by someone talented.

I'm looking for the support of seconders or really good reasons why one or more of these shouldn't be featured. I'm not sure if Image 1 has a free license.

Articles these images appear in: Image 1:
Tribal art · African art
Image 2:
Wood as a medium · Ebony · African art
Image 3:
Mask · Beti-Pahuin peoples · Les Demoiselles d'Avignon · Picasso's African Period · Musée de l'Homme · An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" · African traditional masks
Image 4:
Urhobo · African traditional masks

Creators: Image 1: Photo by Docludi, Image 2: Photo by MisterMatt,
Image 3: Photo by Jastrow, Image 4: Photo by cliff1066 on Flickr
No artisans' names specified or available.

Suggested by: I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 00:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Image 4. I find the shadows on the wall very offputting, shadows on mask itself quite harsh, and lighting in general less than optimal. Size and quality aren't great. Suggest it would fare badly at FPC. Haven't looked at the others. --jjron (talk) 15:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Images 1 and 2 have some poorly removed backgrounds - the edges are rough. Both could be a bit sharper. Image 3 seems like it was taken through glass. Image 4 has the issues jjron mentioned. I think all of them have a decent chance at VPC, but would probably not pass at FPC. Jujutacular ^T · C 20:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

The Delaware Regiment at the Battle of Long Island

**Original** - Colonial American soldiers in combat.

I think this has strong feature picture potential. It is the lead image of the same subject shown in the painting, so definite EV, it is a selected image in a portal and its quality is so good you can see the grain of the canvass. It might need a little work, it might be blacker than it ought to be and the sky a strange tint too much of purplish-pink, but I think the tweaks needed are minor and that this meets the criteria of a featured picture.

Can someone help me find some technical information about the painting, its date and creator? I can't find anything.

Articles this image appears in: Long Island
Battle of Long Island
Portal:American Revolutionary War/Selected event
Portal:American Revolutionary War/Selected event/10

Creator: Domenick D'Andrea, this version uploaded by Spellcast

Suggested by: I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Seconder

This definitely appears featureable. Might need minor edits, as you say, but I'll leave that to someone who knows the original better. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll note that this is not a painting from the period it depicts: here's another from the same painter depicting WWI. This may detract somewhat from its encyclopedic value. Jujutacular ^T · C 18:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The time period shouldn't detract from the actual quality of the painting. I say it's worth going ahead and nominating this for FP. Spellcast (talk) 09:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, I guess I might later, after the Trafalgar fiasco I'm not quite sure of paintings that have deteriorated too much. --I'ḏ ♥One 00:19, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tree of Life

The picture beautifully captures the icon of one of Disney's beloved parks without the obstruction of crowds or other distractions.

Articles this image appears in: The Tree of Life (Disney), Disney's Animal Kingdom

Creator: Clavet

Suggested by: Jclavet (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I'm disappointed in this. It has definite EV to the article, but the quality is unfortunate, can't see many features on it, as compared to this picture for example and the lighting seems to be overexposed. --I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 04:19, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd argue that you can see a lot of features, but they aren't as sharp as the picture you linked to because the camera is farther away from the Tree in order to show the Tree of Life Gardens as well.Jclavet (talk) 15:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added another version of the same photo that I've adjusted. The shadow that was on the tree is now gone so you can see the details on the tree more clearly. Jclavet (talk) 15:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact is though the original is overexposed, leading to clipping. Any edit will be unable to regain details lost in the original exposure (the cloud above shows a lot of clipping). Jujutacular ^T · C 19:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

4 Stroke Engine

**Original** - Animated scheme of a four stroke internal combustion engine, Otto principle: #Suction stroke - Air and vaporised fuel are drawn in. #Compression stroke - Fuel vapor and air are compressed and ignited. #Power stroke - Fuel combusts and piston is pushed downwards. #Exhaust stroke - Exhaust is driven out.

This is a large improvement on the existing image; it is higher resolution, has smoother animation and removes some of the unnecessary detail.

Articles this image appears in: None as yet, but will be on:

Engine
Internal combustion engine
Poppet valve
Camshaft
Petrol engine
Four-stroke engine
Cylinder (engine)
Crankcase
Single cylinder engine

Creator: Richard Wheeler (Zephyris)

Suggested by: - Zephyris _Talk 19:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Note there is a smaller resolution version also available for embedding.
I think an animation of this principle is very useful. The big one doesn't animate? Not to worry, it's too big to embed anyway at 17MB. Personally I think the description should be enhanced, maybe with some labelling, and poor wording such as 'suction stroke' improved. However, other than running a bit smoother, I think I'd need some convincing that it's an improvement over the existing FP File:4-Stroke-Engine.gif. --jjron (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The big version is animated, but Wiki doesn't produce animated thumbnails... Obviously improvement of the caption is easy, at the moment it is copied directly from the existing FP. In terms of improvement I would argue: 1. this version is not pixelated, 2. this version removes unneeded detail making the diagram clearer, 3. this version has far more frames, therefore is a smoother animation. On these terms I would argue this image is better than the existing FP, plus I am available here and now to apply any improvements people suggest! - Zephyris _Talk 23:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Doesn't animate on the image page either when I view that, so I guess you have to open the full image; I wish we could thumbnail animations. In that case I think we'd definitely be only featuring the big one in principle, but in reality featuring the smaller one as that one would be getting used in article space. Yes, you make some good points - I actually liked some of the detail on the original, but now looking at them side by side, I see some more positives to the new one (can I suggest you change that characterless 1 in yours to something with a serif though, like in the existing one? That's jarring with me every time I view it.). I personally - personally - feel the animation may also benefit from being slowed down slightly, but that could just be me, possibly more to the speed of the existing one. BTW your spark is considerably better as well. Labelling on the actual animation may be too messy, but perhaps we could create a single frame version that named all the key parts? --jjron (talk) 13:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  how many pistols are there in these engines 41.122.81.64 (talk) 16:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - - A new slightly slower version with a serif'd "1" will be simple to make... I also have a labeled version as a WIP, I have avoided it so far because it is not multilingual but I will finish it and upload it as an alternative...
Actually, Wikipedia does support animated thumbnails. See the last two thumbnails in this gallery. Recent behind-the-scenes changes made any animations that, in their native size, have 25 million or more total animation pixels (pixel height times pixel width times number of frames) become frozen. So big animations can be “thumbnails” only if they are specified in their native size. I make all my “big” animations (like this one “Cobalt”) in the size they will be actually used in the article. That spinning “NURBS” animation is a thumbnail, but it is specified in native size. The pint-size ones in the gallery are also a thumbnail of sorts. Those wouldn’t work if either of them exceeded 25 million pixels when full size.
BTW, I like this second animation. But I would suggest arrows or particles in the gas stream in both the intake and exhaust ports to indicate the direction of gas flow. Greg L (talk) 03:47, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah. Another example of Wikipedia developers screwing over content. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Images Updated Added in/out arrows for fuel and exhaust, replaced numbers with serif'd font and slowed animation. - Zephyris _Talk 07:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking better I think. Not a fan of the font used though, looks bad - the one in the existing FP looks much nicer. Yeah, the arrows are OK. Personally I'd use more standard thinner black arrows within the gas stream that actually overlap into the engine. Not sure that any of that should go beyond the engine anyway, as it suggests it's coming/going straight from the external air rather than through the (unshown) manifolds - the way the existing one works suggests that it's the diagram that stops there rather than the engine itself (does that make sense?). Maybe the arrows come in a little quick - you've probably timed them to the exact frame where the valve first starts opening, but just watching the animation it feels very sudden. Going good. --jjron (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Well done (Very well done). I think the one captioned “Low res version for imbedding” is outstanding and hope to see it on FPC. Greg L (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion

D&R at FPC. See this. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

African Bush Elephant(s)

**Original** - version 1: A male African Bush Elephant

There seems to be a consensus that Etosha elefant.jpg‎ is not a particularily useful image for enwiki even when I think this ist aesthetically ohe of the best elephant pictures here. The current elephant pictures 1 and 2 are unsharp or poorly framed. So my question to you is if you'd prefer to have one of these pictures as lead images and if yes which one. Could you imagine one of these as FP? Thanks for sharing your thoughts. --Ikiwaner (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles this image appears in: currently unused

Creator: Ikiwaner

Suggested by: Ikiwaner (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Much better than the other photos as far as sharpness and angle showing the whole elephant, but it's disappointing than it seems it was taken on one of the only days it was looking like rain. Still it could possibly pass for its EV and it's not your fault for the overcast. V1 - Um... Has he been mating recently? I prefer the full pack in V2, I think I've heard that male elephants only stay with the herd when they have babies, though V1 shows the whole animal best. --I'ḏ ♥One 20:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. Concerning weather: There are 94 rain days in Serengeti. It's not something unusual. Other opinions? --Ikiwaner (talk) 15:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Sorry, I guess I must be brainwashed by NatGeo, they always show the Serengeti looking like a near-desert. Congrats though, it looks like it's gonna pass on Commons. --I'ḏ ♥One 06:52, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Picture Peer Review Archives

Picture Peer Review Archives Mainpage

Shortcut

WP:PPRA

Please cut and paste nominations to be archived from the Picture peer review mainpage to the top of the appropriate archive page, creating a new archive (by nomination date) when necessary.

2012: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2011: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2010: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2009: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2008: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2007: January - June | July - December
2006: January - December

Pictures that need placing on an appropriate article

If you have an excellent picture, but can't think where to put it, add it to the section below. Similarly if you need help in writing a new article on the subject of a photo, request it below. If you are unsure of what plant or animal is in a picture please ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science.

Pictures that need moving from other Wikipedias

If you have found a good picture on another language Wikipedia that would benefit the English Wikipedia, suggest it below. The image may need confirmation on its identification and assistance with translating the caption and moving to Commons before placing on the equivalent English language article.