Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 20 2016

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Graphosoma lineatum IMG5232.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Graphosoma lineatum --SilviaCoimbra 15:36, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Hubertl 15:43, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Noise + denoising artifacts, posterization in background, probably manually blurred. --Tsungam 19:38, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality and definition. --Cnatario 17:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Jpeg artifacts. --C messier 18:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others--Lmbuga 19:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for QI. --Palauenc05 18:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Per others --Milseburg 18:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No QI for me. Too agressive post processing.--Ermell 22:05, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Overprocessed, essential parts not sharp, lots of artifacts. -- Smial 09:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 09:02, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Married (collars) hamer and son.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Hamar people (by Lourdeschr) --Anthere 09:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • {{s}} Good quality. --Hubertl 16:26, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment No complaints about photographic value. But not complying with QIC rule Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. --Cccefalon 09:06, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 Comment Why is it a problem here, but not e.g. in File:Hue Vietnam Thien-Mu-Temple-and-Pagoda-03.jpg and very many other photos of identifiable people in category:Quality images of people? -- Smial 12:37, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 Comment Is it really too much asked or is it really so difficult for the authors to apply the personality rights template? For the other images I already gave this hint. But the problem is, that people are discharging their photos here and after that give a shit on the hints what is to do and what is not to do. --Cccefalon 09:38, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
In this special case with the women, I would say, that this happens during a tourist visit, were people were paid for beeing photographed. See the tourist in the background. Usually they are very strict, not being captured without money. The picture from the monk boy is the same problem we have now at FP. --Hubertl 12:54, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support --Hubertl 07:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC) see my comment.
  • Weak  Support, background not perfect. Good lighting. Tight crop supports composition. -- Smial 09:24, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 09:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)