Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

Jump to navigation Jump to search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.

Promoting an image

If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.

The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.

Delisting an image

A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:.If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.

  • Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.


Step 3:
Transclude and link

Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (direct link).

How to comment for Candidate Images

  • Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
  • Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
  • You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

How to comment for Delist Images

  • Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
  • Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
  • Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
  • You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
Please remember to be civil, not to bite the newbies and to comment on the image, not the person.

You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.

Editing candidates

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Highlight test image.svg
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Colortest.png
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
To see recent changes, purge the page cache.
FPCs needing feedback
Grivet (Chlorocebus aethiops) head 2.jpg Grivet

Current nominations[edit]

Passiflora caerulea (blue passionflower) STEREO (R-L)[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 17:50:07 (UTC)

Original – Two Passiflora caerulea flowers arranged as a stereo image pair. To be viewed cross-eyed.
Reason
Featured picture (also Quality image) on Wiki commons, one of very few cross-eyed stereo images, POTD 2019-08-14 on French Wikipedia, high-resolution image, links to articles on EN/FR wikipedias.
Articles in which this image appears
stereoscopy,   fr: Stéréoscopie,   fr: "Image du jour" / Picture of the Day 2019-08-14
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment
Creator
Franz van Duns
  • Support as nominatorFranz van Duns (talk) 17:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Needs to be in article for 7 days to be eligible. Shall we wait, or will you re-nominate is when 7 days have passed? Tentative support. --Janke | Talk 19:32, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Oops, many thanks for this crucial hint! I admit I hadn't discovered this "7 days wait before eligibility term" on my highly exciting journey through the ways and wends of Wikipedia's numerous regulation pages, coming as I am from just over a year's membership at Wiki commons with its slightly different set of nomination proceedings. Yes, of course, I am absolutely willing to comply and thus agree to wait the required 7 days' latency period (i.e. till 2019-08-25/26) before proceeding, and I'll surely wait for the required 7 days should I ever nominate another image. But in this case I do think this image's encyclopaedic value will entice enough supporters within the given time span and will thus justify this extra quarantine period. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 21:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



Capitolium of Brixia[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 14:00:36 (UTC)

Original – The Capitolium of Brixia was the main temple in the center of the Roman town of Brixia (Brescia). It has been partially reconstructed and repurposed as a museum.
Reason
FP on Commons of this World Heritage site
Articles in which this image appears
Capitolium of Brixia, Longobards in Italy: Places of Power (568–774 A.D.), Brixia
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Wolfgang Moroder
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 14:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



Eryngium giganteum 'Miss Willmott's Ghost'[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 17:30:13 (UTC)

Original – Eryngium giganteum 'Miss Willmott's Ghost'
Reason
Sharp photo with many FP support on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panicaut
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Plants
Creator
famberhorst
  • Support as nominatorFamberhorst (talk) 17:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • But this is currently unused on en, so how can it be featured? —David Eppstein (talk) 18:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    • It is now, check the file description page. MER-C 19:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)



Delist and Replace: Woman Suffrage Procession[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 05:02:47 (UTC)

Original: To be replaced I did my best with a fairly bad source, which included damage to the leftmost woman's shoulder, which I almost got right when I fixed it.
Suggested replacement: Re-restored from alternate source. Not as saturated, but it's probably more accurate. Shoulder is as it was originally.
Reason
Improved source allowed the fixing of errors in the original restoration.
Articles this image appears in
Quite a few, including Woman suffrage parade of 1913, Women's suffrage, National American Woman Suffrage Association, etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Women's Suffrage
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs
  • Delist and replaceAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 05:02, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist and replace – Good faith effort on the first restoration attempt, but there were significant differences to historical. The shape of the woman in the rear for example.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 18:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace per restorer request. MER-C 19:00, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace --Janke | Talk 07:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)



Queen bee[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 19:25:14 (UTC)

OriginalQueen bee (marked) and workers of the Africanised honey bee, Apis mellifera scutellata
Reason
Good quality, high EV, marvellous composition
Articles in which this image appears
Queen bee, Animal identification, Gyne, Invasive species in the United States
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Scott Bauer, USDA Agricultural Research Service
  • Support as nominatorTomer T (talk) 19:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm somewhat unsure about the marking. It's otherwise very good. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 20:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – EV. I am Ok with the marking, for encyclopedic use. Focus looks a bit off on top-left corner, but that's because a couple of bees are climbing on top of others!! The composition makes up for it. Bammesk (talk) 02:25, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 18:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. DreamSparrow Chat 04:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. I like the marking; what it takes away from in-the-wild authenticity, it adds back in viewer ease of picking out the queen given the description in the caption. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



Louisa May Alcott[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 04:48:33 (UTC)

OriginalLouisa May Alcott, c. 1870
Reason
A fine image of someone I've wanted to have an image for for years. Author of many books, amongst which Little Women is probably the most famous, Civil War nurse and abolitionist, she has a fascinating life. Before this, the best image we had of her was teeny-tiny and badly over exposed.
Articles in which this image appears
Louisa May Alcott et al.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator
George Kendall Warren (d. 1884); restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 04:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – Top EV. --Janke | Talk 07:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – A shoo-in. – Sca (talk) 13:52, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 15:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. DreamSparrow Chat 04:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



Veraison[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2019 at 19:50:19 (UTC)

Original – Zinfandel grapes in Dry Creek Valley during veraison.
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously. High EV, nice capture.
Articles in which this image appears
Veraison, Zinfandel
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits
Creator
Frank Schulenburg
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:50, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment: Thanks so much. This is very meaningful to me, as Sonoma winemaking has been close to my heart ever since moving to the U.S. Btw I’m planning a project to cover wine making in California for 2020. So, more to come… —Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:01, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Some of the grapes don't look all healthy, have damage, so better images must exist or can be taken. Waiting for more to come! :-) --Janke | Talk 20:04, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
    • I also find the composition rather messy, with distracting background. --Janke | Talk 08:53, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Minor damage, nothing more. It'd be weird to have everything perfect, in my opinion. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 04:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – Very natural, good specimen, and nice lighting. We don't want a photo one can find in a coffee table book but rather an authentic representative photo, which this very much is. The subject veraison is very well represented here. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:01, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Well I do want a photo I could find in a coffee table book. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Commons is over there. I want photos that I would find in a modern good encyclopedia. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:32, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose – good EV, but the shadows (lighting) and background can be better, per Janke a better image can be taken. Bammesk (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)



Grivet (2)[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 19:06:10 (UTC)

OriginalGrivet (Chlorocebus aethiops) from Ethiopia
Reason
High quality image illustrates article well. FP on Commons. Received two support votes (WiiWillieWiki) (including nominator). No oppose votes.
Articles in which this image appears
Grivet, Chlorocebus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 19:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Excuse me if this a stupid question, but do we know gender? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:35, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I try to look in the right place, but not this time... Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • "Show - Place - Win"... ;-) --Janke | Talk 16:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Remember Wikipedia surrounds it with white, which may bias viewers of the thumbnail a little bit. I also think it's fine, though I suppose, since acceptable exposure is a range, a little tweaking would be acceptable, but not too much. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 15:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



Palestine sunbird (2)[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 18:56:24 (UTC)

Reason
High quality image of a bird that barely stops while feeding. FP on Commons. National bird of Palestine. On first nomination received 4 support votes (Chris Woodrich, Yann, Brandmeister) including nominator. No oppose votes.
Articles in which this image appears
Palestine sunbird, Cinnyris, List of national animals
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – Be nice if you can identify the flower as well? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Can anyone help identify the plant/flower? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 05:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 08:47, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 15:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. DreamSparrow Chat 04:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



Pauline Adams redux[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 21:53:33 (UTC)

OriginalPauline Adams, suffragette, in her prison garb from her arrest for attempting to "flaunt their banners" in front of Woodrow Wilson's reviewing stand before a Selective Service parade on September 4, 1917." She later appealed, under the grounds her rights were "flagrantly disregarded in the trial court and that they were not accorded a fair and impartial trial" - and won.
Reason
Fixed the top of the cup after the criticism in the last nomination of the top of the cup being cut off. Enough of the edge still exists that, with perspective, it's easy to reconstruct the top edge.
Articles in which this image appears
Pauline Adams
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
Uncredited photographer, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 21:53, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Did she really say her rights were "fragrantly disregarded" or is that a typo for "flagrantly"? If the former, we need a [sic]. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Typo. I checked the source, and corrected the article. Don't know how I missed that. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 14:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
It would work well with a certain type of humor, though. – Sca (talk) 14:43, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – Not bad for a century-old photo. I like the quasi-Statue of Liberty pose. – Sca (talk) 14:46, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 17:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Kaldari (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Question. Is it considered acceptable to extrapolate significant portions of the image out of thin air, call it a restoration, and not even mention it in the caption? It's a fine image now, but shouldn't it be more clearly labeled as a photo-illustration rather than calling it a photo? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
    • It is just the top of a cup, part of which was there before. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 05:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
      • The restoration is mentioned in the file info, albeit buried in the version list... Might better be mentioned in the file description. --Janke | Talk 06:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 05:43, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 15:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support after the update to the description. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
    • @David Eppstein: Sorry about that! I added it when I saw Janke's suggestion, but didn't think to mention it here until now. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 22:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC)



Noordhoek, Cape Town[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 13:22:11 (UTC)

Original – Noordhoek Beach from Chapman's Peak Drive with Kommetjie in the distance.
Reason
Seen on Commons FPC last week, where it passed unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears
Noordhoek, Cape Town
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 13:22, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 11:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support but want oppose because I am jealous. ;-P --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 05:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 03:18, 15 August 2019 (UTC)



Kriéger Landaulette redux[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 01:44:26 (UTC)

Original – Senator George P. Wetmore of Rhode Island in a Krieger Landaulette electric car
Reason
A fine image of an electric vehicle in use. Sorry it took so long to restore. Previous nomination: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kriéger Landaulette. It's CSS cropped in articles, but I think it's useful to have the full size.
Articles in which this image appears
Kriéger Company of Electric Vehicles, George P. Wetmore
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator
Harris & Ewing, Inc., restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 01:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 09:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Good job fixing the botched retouching! --Janke | Talk 11:17, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • *@Janke: Honestly, the sad thing is it probably wasn't exactly botched. If it was meant for a newspaper or the like, exaggerating the mouth lines might have been valuable - and the resolution woukdn't have been high enough for anyone to care about the zoomed-in effect. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 16:18, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 12:19, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 11:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)



Gliophorus chromolimoneus[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:31:35 (UTC)

Original – Gliophorus chromolimoneus, Ferndale Park, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Reason
High quality image of a small subject.
Articles in which this image appears
Gliophorus chromolimoneus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Fungi
Creator
JJ Harrison



Clavulinopsis sulcata[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:34:05 (UTC)

Original – Clavulinopsis sulcata, Lane Cove River, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Reason
Illustrates the article well. Well lit and focus stacked for more stuff in focus than a single shot.
Articles in which this image appears
Clavulinopsis sulcata
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Fungi
Creator
JJ Harrison



Nominations — to be closed[edit]

Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.

Older nominations requiring additional input from users[edit]

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

Closing procedure[edit]

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.

When promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
    • Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
    Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Add the image to:
  3. Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
    The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
  4. Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
  5. Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
  6. If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
  7. Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  8. If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the August archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Delist closing procedure[edit]

Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  3. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.

If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Recently closed nominations[edit]

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Set: Heinrich C. Berann NPS panoramas[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 15:13:09 (UTC)

Reason
Recently featured in the Signpost and just passed FPC unanimously on Commons. These are truly outstanding maps, with a reproduction that is equally excellent. For context, see [1].
Articles in which this image appears
Heinrich C. Berann
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Maps
Creator
Heinrich C. Berann

Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of North Cascades without labels.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Yosemite without labels.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Yellowstone without labels.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Denali without labels.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)


Two-tailed pasha (2)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 21:07:55 (UTC)

OriginalTwo-tailed pasha (Charaxes jasius jasius) in Sithonia, Greece. The only charaxes butterfly in Europe.
Reason
first nomination for the nominator's vote and 3 support votes PetarM, Chris Woodrich, Marvellous Spider-Man.No oppose votes.
Articles in which this image appears
Charaxes jasius
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 21:07, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 16:48, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • How about rotating it 90 degrees? It would be easier to look at. Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I do rotate butterfly images, but this is a normal position for this species. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Furthermore, if rotated, the light would appear to come from below - which would look quite unnatural! Support --Janke | Talk 17:03, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Not if the image is rotated 90 degrees as suggested (clockwise). The light would be coming from right, slightly above horizon. Bammesk (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
  • But the feet would be all wrong - see the way it is gripping the twig. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Two-tailed pasha (Charaxes jasius jasius) Greece.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)



Marsh fritillaries mating (2)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 20:59:59 (UTC)

OriginalMarsh fritillary butterflies (Euphydryas aurinia) mating (male left, female right) in Dorset, England
Reason
High EV. Very sharp image. FP on Commons. Previous nomination got nominator's vote and 2 support votes Chris Woodrich, Janke , no oppose votes
Articles in which this image appears
Marsh fritillary
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Charlesjsharp

Promoted File:Marsh fritillaries (Euphydryas aurinia) mating.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)



The Guilty Mother[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 05:15:20 (UTC)

Original – Bégéarss from The Guilty Mother
Reason
For the oddly least-well-known of the Figaro plays, there's still a lot to like. Bégéarss, an Irishman (I'm pretty sure his name is a terrible pun, think something like "Begorrah!"), is the character it, in a way, turns around, his schemes pushing everything forwards. It's a very good illustration. I've cropped it to centre the text. I could see cropping the note in the bottom right closer to, to centre the figure more. Crop is a compromise between image and text centering.
Articles in which this image appears
The Guilty Mother
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Émile Bayard, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 05:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 12:31, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 02:04, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Masum Reza📞 21:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 07:16, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 09:07, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Émile Bayard - Beaumarchais - Bégéarss in La mère coupable, 1876.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)



Umhlanga, Eswatini[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 06:21:40 (UTC)

Original – The 2006 Umhlanga (Reed Dance) ceremony in Eswatini.
Reason
I think this serves a purpose separate to the identification of the people in it (though the centremost one is Sikhanyiso Dlamini): It does an excellent job at showing the garb and pomp of Umhlanga
Articles in which this image appears
Umhlanga (ceremony), Swazi people, Sikhanyiso Dlamini
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle seems best.
Creator
Amada44
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 06:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Has that 'snapshot' feel about it. The cut-off breast on the LHS isn't good. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Sorry Adam, but running a crowd pic without IDs serves little purpose in terms of EV. (An exception might be crowd pix illustrating major news events. But even the most widely known photo from the 1970 Kent State shooting carried IDs.)Sca (talk) 14:18, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
@Sca: That's hardly true. Festivals generally don't have everyone identified. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 16:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to contradict again, but my professional experience is otherwise. If you really want to know I can tell you about a local illustrated magazine I once helped edit. Sca (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
PS: As an ed. I'd be reluctant to run a photo whose point of focus seems to be the subject's exposed right breast. No prude here, but it seems inappropriate. Sca (talk) 20:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - jumbled, unfocused composition. MER-C 14:28, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose – I am all for featuring au naturale but this is just not FP material. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:55, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support (but please crop that LHS nipple out per Charles). I'm going to go against the grain here - I think it has EV and we constantly fail to promote photojournalistic or documentary images of the human world. JJ Harrison (talk) 06:37, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:19, 14 August 2019 (UTC)



Polystichum setiferum[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 09:53:18 (UTC)

Original – Close-up of a new leaf of Polystichum setiferum
Reason
Nice detail, recently unanimously featured on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Polystichum setiferum
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants
Creator
Dominicus Johannes Bergsma
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 09:53, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – but I prefer this version, it looks sharp enough and is easier to look at (it has a softer background). Bammesk (talk) 12:50, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Thank you for nominating my photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 09:35, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Polystichum setiferum 'Cristato Pinnulum' (Niervaren). (d.j.b.). 02.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:16, 13 August 2019 (UTC)



Apostlebird[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 01:38:09 (UTC)

Original – Apostlebird (Struthidea cinerea), Pinegrove Memorial Park, New South Wales, Australia
CSS image crop, suggestion
CSS image crop, suggestion
Reason
Reshoot!
Articles in which this image appears
Apostlebird
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
JJ Harrison
  • Effect of the lens, not manual blurring. See this. --cart-Talk 10:23, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Sure, as I said, opposed on aethetic grounds. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • That was said on my talk page on Commons, not here, so I'm glad you clarified your vote on this page too. Your very short reviews can sometimes be too short and hard to understand. --cart-Talk 13:48, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Contrast between grass and blurred parts just looks unnatural. --A.Savin (talk) 13:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not a good compo IMO. In some cases this special lens can make astonishing photos, but for this the bird gets sharp while the whole scene looks strange and unnatural. --cart-Talk 14:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – I added a CSS image crop as a suggestion. The image has EV. Per user:Cart I looked at the flickr examples here. These two photographers [3], [4] list lens settings very similar to the nom image. The foreground bokeh's abrupt transition to the in-focus region is a common thing [5], [6], [7], [8]. These two photos [9], [10] are very interesting: same lens setting but dissimilar bokeh because of foreground distance or elevation. Here is the lens wide open: [11]. Bammesk (talk) 14:25, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Just as an addendum. There is a technique aspect to this - the photo is taken prone with the camera very close to the ground. This means that the background is relatively distant and hence out of focus. JJ Harrison (talk) 09:06, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Noted, it makes more sense now. The heavy blur of the foreground bokeh is distracting. Such blur is common in backgrounds (expected), but not usually seen in foregrounds. Also, the abrupt transition between it and the in-focus region amplifies the effect, as if the ground is elevated in the near field and obstructing the view, rather than flat. Weak support original, some cropping of the foreground would be an improvement IMO. Bammesk (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Alt Cwilson97 (talk) 18:14, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Alt.--Vulphere 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)



Variable Oystercatcher[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 01:35:37 (UTC)

Original – Variable Oystercatcher (Haematopus unicolor), Point Chevalier, Auckland, New Zealand
Reason
High quality image of a New Zealand endemic
Articles in which this image appears
Variable oystercatcher
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
JJ Harrison
  • Support as nominatorJJ Harrison (talk) 01:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – EV. Bammesk (talk) 12:52, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 09:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support, though if you can get a bit more DoF in front of the bird, I think it'll improve your compositions. The immediate foreground always looks a little odd in them. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 10:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Do you mean to say that I lied down in wet sand for nothing?! =) JJ Harrison (talk) 03:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Haematopus unicolor - Point Chevalier.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)



Delist: Newborn of Lesser short-nosed fruit bat.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 20:26:24 (UTC)

A neonate of an insectivorous microbat, surely, not a frugivorous megabat
Reason
This is clearly misidentified. Copying from my post on the Commons file talk page, This article states that newborns of this species weigh ca. 11g at birth. Little brown bats, for example, weigh 5.5–12.5 g as adults. Look at the size of an adult little brown bat relative to the human hand, though [12]. They're small, but definitely not small enough to sit on a fingertip. This is definitely a wrong identification. I believe this image thus fails 5 and 6 of the Featured picture criteria. We may never know the real ID of this bat neonate, giving this image limited encyclopedic value.
Articles this image appears in
none anymore
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lesser short-nosed fruit bat
Nominator
Enwebb (talk)
  • DelistEnwebb (talk) 20:26, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist, at least until the identification can be sorted out. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:47, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Delist nominee has some problem. User agreed that cannot give a definitive answer, and this is not megabat, but Lesser short-nosed fruit bat. Again user talk about weight, why he/she can't describe/object by size? Look at here and tell where it fits? I took it in Sri Lanka. Your disbelief should be with reliable fact. Give me factual explanation than disbelief. --AntanO 16:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • This article says weight 30 to 100 g, length 70 to 127 mm. --AntanO 16:37, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Cynopterus sphinx is a species of megabat as it is in the family Pteropodidae. Not only is this neonate clearly of a different family based on size, let alone the same genus and species, but it is clearly a different family because it has a tragus clearly visible in the photograph. Bats in Pteropodidae do not have tragi [13]. No, I don't know what this bat species is (which makes two of us). I know with certainty that it is not this species though, which is enough to say that it shouldn't be a FP. Enwebb (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Why do you talk about Cynopterus sphinx. It is Lesser short-nosed fruit bat and it has tragus. If you reject the ID, give correct one with reference. I photographed with context awareness and I know what are the spices were there. I have given the geo location too. You just oppose without valid reason. --AntanO 03:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
Apologies for the incorrect scientific name. You are correct, it is labeled as Cynopterus brachyotis. No, that species doesn't have a tragus. It is a megabat and megabats do not have tragi. I provided a reference above. My reason for oppposing (and everyone else's) is that you have incorrectly identified this bat species. Bats are generally identified using an adult specimen in hand with a dichotomous key. Measurements such as forearm length, greatest length of skull, weight, hind foot length, ear length, and echolocation characteristics are all used. I will not be making a positive ID of this species and I shouldn't have to, because I'm not the one who uploaded it to Commons. It's not my job to fix your ID. As someone who spends many hours working on bat articles, however, I am taking these steps because your erroneous ID is harming public knowledge. Enwebb (talk) 03:15, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
First link given is for Greater short-nosed fruit bat, and second link for Little brown bat which is 5.5–12.5 g (as adults). But, I named it for Lesser short-nosed fruit bat which is 21 - 32 g / 30 - 100 g (as adults). Therefore, newborn can sit on finger. Also, Lesser short-nosed fruit bat has tragi/ear, and you can see it. You said Pteropodidae do not have tragi. What is that ear-shaped portion? Have you ever seen newborn of Lesser short-nosed fruit bat? You just referring from book knowledge. But, I have seen and photographed where Lesser short-nosed fruit bats come to eat fruits. There is no Greater short-nosed fruit bat or Little brown bat (which is not in Sri Lanka). A few were trapped at a house when they changed flight and gave birth. There was 99% change for Lesser short-nosed fruit bat unless 1% change for microbat which infiltrated to that house! --AntanO 17:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
The pinna are the external ears. Megabats have ears/pinna. The tragi are cartilage flaps in front of the ear opening. Megabats don't have tragi. The bat pictured has a tragus in front of its ear. Therefore it cannot be the species you say it is (nor any bat in that family). Enwebb (talk) 18:45, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
You can't conclude from a baby bat. It is common. Also, it has similarity ears like adult of its spices. --AntanO 03:16, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist - on enwiki's FPC process, it's important to get the species right (and it should be used in articles). Ideally, when we find a misidentification, we would also find the correct identification, but it sounds like that's an exceedingly difficult task by photo alone. Unless someone else can provide an alternative, we should thus delist. Commons FP status is less of a problem, though. Misidentification isn't good, but I don't know how willing people would be to delist just on that basis... — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist. Not in use, not clearly identified. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • How to clearly identify? --AntanO 16:07, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist.--Vulphere 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:25, 10 August 2019 (UTC)



CT scan of a pregnancy[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 13:33:41 (UTC)

OriginalCT scan with volume rendering of a woman who was pregnant at 37 weeks.
Reason
*The acquisition of an image like this depends on a series of unlikely events. First, the pregnancy was relatively late, making the baby's anatomy more clear. Second, the woman had to be in an accident serious enough to warrant a CT without radiation dose reduction (which would be of much lower quality, and in this case it was a high speed traffic accident). At the same time, the woman did not have any visible physical damage, thereby allowing for an image of normal anatomy (and getting her written consent for its online publication).
  • Several processing steps in order to make a rotating gif image from CT data. However, I do not know how to remove the "FLP" and cube at the bottom.
  • Although there's a larger version, that one is too big to be animated in the wiki.
Articles in which this image appears
Pregnancy, Medical imaging, Medical imaging in pregnancy
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Sciences/Biology
Creator
Mikael Häggström
  • Support as nominatorMikael Häggström (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - high EV, and unusual for FPC. MER-C 14:40, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - Top EV, indeed. (I actually thought of the radiation risk before reading the info...) --Janke | Talk 21:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:37, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 02:21, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – though shouldn't we feature the highest resolution version, with a note that the lower resolution version needs to be used for thumbnail use in articles for technical reasons? (But that seems a technical question, the content is the same.) TSP (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
To me, it seems counter-intuitive for Wikipedia to feature a version that it cannot properly display. Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Imagine if we could support some modern video and animation formats. How cool would that be? JJ Harrison (talk) 06:39, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi 07:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support.--Vulphere 09:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Volume rendered CT scan of a pregnancy of 37 weeks of gestational age (smaller).gif --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)



Chuquicamata[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2019 at 19:05:06 (UTC)

Original – A close-up of the wall of the Chuquicamata copper mine in Chile
Reason
I couldn't tell it from a hole in the ground. Nice detail, FP on Commons. (There is a panorama of the mine, also a FP on Commons, but it is cut off on the left hand side. Please say if you want it considered.)
Articles in which this image appears
Chuquicamata
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:05, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – Monochromatic tableau lacking a central focus. – Sca (talk) 21:51, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – I think the panorama is more encyclopedic. Bammesk (talk) 01:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Confusing perspective, especially when comparing to the panorama. As you said, you couldn't tell it from a hole in the ground. I'd say it looks rather dull. Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:39, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment. This could look good printed very large, in the vein of Edward Burtynsky. That way you could see the vehicles more clearly and get a better sense of scale. But I think that cropping out all the context makes it less encyclopedic, and that it doesn't work as well at the small image sizes typical of an encyclopedia article. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:07, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)



Suspended nominations[edit]

This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.

Sikhanyiso Dlamini[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2019 at 14:16:21 (UTC)

Original – Princess Sikhanyiso Dlamini of Eswatini
Alt 1 - crop
Reason
A really fine image of the royalty of an extremely under-represented country.
Articles in which this image appears
Sikhanyiso Dlamini, Culture of Eswatini, and a gallery usage in Eswatini
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Royalty
Creator
Amada44
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 14:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support either. Eye-catching, high-quality, and encyclopedic. I'm curious about something: the caption explains the red feathers in her hair (a mark of royalty) but not the thing she's carrying, which (from its appearance in the rest of the set) appears to be some kind of ceremonial weapon, possibly a mace. Would it be possible to track down an explanation and add it to the caption? —David Eppstein (talk) 16:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support in principle – as an intriguing and engaging human image (Could be cropped a bit on both sides.) However, the person to the subject's left (right side of frame) really must be identified also. – Sca (talk) 22:42, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
    • There's a crop at File:Princess Sikhanyiso Dlamini-001.jpg but I think it's too tight and cuts off the other princess's face. But I think cropping from the left side only, down to around a 5x4 aspect ratio, could help focus attention on the subject better. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:19, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
    • We know the person next to her is another member of the royal family. Probably Princess Temaswati Dlamini, given she's the only one of about the right age. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 01:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Conditional support, prefer original - please identify the other person in the image. MER-C 10:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
    • @MER-C: I mean, it's probably Princess Temaswati Dlamini, but I'm not going to be able to provide sources for that other than lists of the Eswatini royalty and identified photographs of her from a few years later. Only royalty is allowed that headdress, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 15:04, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Very tight crop
(From French Wiki)


FYI, several other Wikis use a very tightly cropped version with their Sikhanyiso Dlamini articles. It excludes all but the other person's ear, which obviates the ID issue, although aesthetically it's less interesting. →
Sca (talk) 16:04, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
We could just say "another member of the royal family" in the caption. I think that part is clear enough. Searching Getty Images for Temaswati finds images of her in similar costume from 2004, 2005, and 2007, but unfortunately not 2006, and the 2005 image shows several other young women also wearing the red feathers, so I think we can't just assume that this is Temaswati. There is also another photo from 2006, but without names; she is third in the line after the leader of the dance and then Sikhanyiso, suggesting that she probably is indeed Temaswati, but again there are quite a few others with red feathers. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:52, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Please excuse me for saying so, but from a journalistic point of view, saying "another member of" would be laughably tantamount to saying "and someone else, whose name we failed to get." – Sca (talk) 22:17, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────It is clear that we do not have documentation for the name. Why do you think it is inappropriate or laughable to say so? Do you think we should try to cover it up or pretend to knowledge that we don't have? Do you think we also need the name of the blurred woman in the left margin or the blurred man on the right? Does our lack of knowledge of these things somehow turn this into a bad photo of Sikhanyiso Dlamini, or of the reed dance? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

People shown in FPs should be identified. Otherwise readers will be left asking, "Who's this?" - Sca (talk) 01:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – There is no need for the other person's name. The composition centers on the princess, the other person is incidental to the composition, especially with the blade in front of her face. The article, the EV and the photo all center on the princess. The Alt 1 crop is too tight, the origonal is better, it shows the princess in a group setting, and doesn't cut off her pole awkwardly on the left. Bammesk (talk) 03:54, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Due to lack of ID for second person in photo. I do so reluctantly, but I can't endorse cavalier disregard for established and logical editorial practice. – Sca (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I have emailed some people about the ID of the person right. How is the etiquette about voting on the own photograph? Amada44  talk to me 13:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Photographers support, or nominate and support their own photos all the time. MER-C 13:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
If the ID were found, I'd support. Sca (talk) 14:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Alt 1 is a bit better. No need for the name of the other person. –Yann (talk) 17:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm leaning towards opposition while the second subject is unidentified. Perhaps it would be worth putting this on hold while it's looked into? Josh Milburn (talk) 19:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose I don't find the stated reason as compelling the promotion of an average composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Hold for a few weeks until Amada44 can come back with ID for the second royal in the photograph. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
    • agree, if possible. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 17:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
      • that would be nice. I did not hear back but I'll get that name! Amada44  talk to me 18:53, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
        • Amada44, just so you know an IP at the Reference Desk has suggested that it may be Princess Tiyandza Dlamini. Just for the record, I support the original conditional on ID. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:41, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Put on hold Closure postponed for 2-3 weeks per above to give time for the identification of the second person in the image. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:21, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[Amended Armbrust The Homunculus 08:10, 11 August 2019 (UTC)]
    • I mean, we are in the situation where if Amada44 supported it, it'd be passing, but it's still better if it is identified. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs 06:14, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support The original. The crop is a bit too tight imho. I am a bit further with the ID of the person right, but not quite there yet. Amada44  talk to me 11:04, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Armbrust: if this nomination is listed as "on hold" (as it is), what do you mean by claiming that there can be no more supports and by striking the support that was added after it was put on hold? Do you intend that we should continue to keep this on hold until the identity issue is resolved but then go back and count only the opinions that were expressed before it went on hold, even though some of the opinions are explicitly based on the missing information that caused the hold? What is the point of putting a nomination into such a "frozen but will automatically fail once it unfreezes" state? —David Eppstein (talk) 00:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @David Eppstein: Okay, I may have phrased that poorly. Now fixed. (BTW there are 4 supports and 1 conditional support, so once id is provided it automatically passes.) Armbrust The Homunculus 08:10, 11 August 2019 (UTC)