Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

Skip to:

Table of contents
Current nominations
To be closed
More input needed
Recently closed
Suspended candidates

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-thirds 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-thirds 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).

Shortcuts

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?

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.

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.

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 the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.

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 view edit
	Ford Strikers Riot
	Leo von Klenze

Current nominations[edit]

Delist and Replace:Shakespeare[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 08:27:40 (UTC)

Reason: The current FP was promoted about 16 years ago, and still is a good one. But there is a better file with sharper and higher res scan of the original, that is already used in the main subject article as lead image, as well as multiple other important articles. The proposed replacement is also the one closer to the original colors of the painting.
Articles this image appears in: about 70 articles
Articles the proposed replacement appears: Act (drama), Life of William Shakespeare, Outline of William Shakespeare, Shakespeare bibliography and William Shakespeare
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William Shakespeare
Nominator: The Herald (Benison) (talk)

Delist and/or replace — Once D&R done, I'll update the articles with the new FP. I have dropped a message on the original nominator, but they aren't active in three years.The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace. Source is the gallery hosting the painting itself. Colours are probably better although I'm not sure what happened in the top left corner. MER-C 18:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Based on the current FP, the proposal could get some cleaning. Yann (talk) 21:34, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly my area of expertise, but summoning Adam Cuerden for a review, please. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For whatever reason, paintings are usually considered off-limits, even when the lighting is going to emphasise or de-emphasize the cracks and dust. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 12:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. And BTW, the Beethoven pic was a case in point, IMO. -- Sca (talk) 14:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican vine snake[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 05:18:56 (UTC)

Reason: FP on Commons; used in the article's infobox
Articles in which this image appears: Oxybelis aeneus
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator: The Cosmonaut

Support as nominator – The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Though I'd have preferred more of the snake, rather than just the head for better EV. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Well, some people like to give head~~. I mean, Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 18:22, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Challenger 2 Tank Firing[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 22:16:22 (UTC)

Reason: Image is OGL licensed, high resolution, and with the round in motion, showing gaseous discharge. Captures a very cool dynamic moment.
Articles in which this image appears: Challenger 2
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator: Cpl Si Longworth

Support as nominator – LegalSmeagolian (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – ―Howard • 🌽³³ 17:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 18:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:57, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support High quality photo that clearly illustrates one of the key features of this tank, so the EV is also very high. Nick-D (talk) 10:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drip painting[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 19:49:57 (UTC)

Reason: Since nothing by Jackson Pollock appears to be available with a free license, this is a good substitute, showing an (admittedly less-than-abstract) example of the technique. Large, colorful, eye-catching, with a free CC-BY-SA license. The article is short, but informative. (Oops, just noted it's been only 5 or 6 days in the article... does that matter?)
Articles in which this image appears: Drip painting
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Ole Hedeager

Support as nominator – Janke | Talk 19:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As this is appears to be an original artwork by a living artist, I suspect that a VRT ticket confirming that they have released it under Wikipedia-friendly licences is needed. At present all we've got to go on is that an account with the same name as the claimed artist uploaded this, and that's a bit risky. Googling the name of the artist also doesn't return anything indicating their notability - all the returns seem to be websites or sales listings linked to them rather than works about the artist. Nick-D (talk) 21:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the nomination is not about the artist, but the drip painting technique, of which we have no other example, AFAIK. His contact info is on https://www.olehedeager.com/, somebody more experienced could ask for a VRT (assuming there is some support for this FPC)... --Janke | Talk 07:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I emailed the artist myself, and asked him to send his permission to VRT. --Janke | Talk 13:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sebkha of Oran (Salt lake)[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 10:51:52 (UTC)

Reason: I found the timing of the shot to be perfect for capturing a unique location in Oran, Algeria called Sebkha.
Articles in which this image appears: Sebkha of Oran
FP category for this image: Natural phenomena
Creator: Terki hassaine samir

Support as nominator – Riad Salih (talk) 16:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose does not have sufficient EV. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. A very pretty picture, but at the cost of showing much detail of the subject Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 19:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination transcluded to WP:FPC. MER-C 10:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - agree with Charles. MER-C 10:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per Charles. – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2024 at 05:11:45 (UTC)

Original – The Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse, Baltimore, Maryland

Reason: Odd format, but incredible encyclopedic value.
Articles in which this image appears: Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse (lead image of which is a still)
FP category for this image: We have another bridge collapse at Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History, so...
Creator: National Transportation Safety Board

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 05:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too long and not very interesting. The EV would be in the amazing live video of the collapse. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Same. For what it's worth, I'd propose this image. There are a lot of very good images connected to this event, it's just a question of finding which ones are best. Moonreach (talk) 14:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Sorry, but vids of the event have flooded the net since last week, along with countless news stories. All too familiar. – Sca (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Seems to pass all criteria, high EV, good quality. 🐱FatCat96🐱 Chat with Cat 03:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose – interesting and high EV but also unwieldy to have such a long video, will users even watch the whole thing? LegalSmeagolian (talk) 14:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – For the EV. Users interested in the subject will appreciate having the video in the article as they read the text. It shows a clear close-up view on the day of the collapse. Bammesk (talk) 00:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oppose Still reviewing but the first 21 seconds isn't really needed and the drone propellers enter the shot at 5:15. Might be worth trying to cut something together as an edited highlight.©Geni (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fraunhofer lines[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2024 at 03:28:02 (UTC)

Reason: Quality image shows the physical phenomenon Fraunhofer lines, which are the absorption dips in the optical spectrum of the sun. The dips are caused by the absorption of sun's radiated energy by atoms in the sun's atmosphere. This phenomenon was first observed in 1814. The nominated image is a recent quality measurement and dates to 2022. The image is not in the infobox, but it is properly placed next to a corresponding table which lists the dips, their wavelengths and the corresponding atoms.
Articles in which this image appears: Fraunhofer lines
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Understanding
Creator: Cyamahat

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great Sphinx of Tanis[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2024 at 02:20:19 (UTC)

Reason: High quality lead image in the Tanis Sphinx article. This sculpture potentially dates back to around 2000 BC or perhaps earlier. I placed the image in the infobox today. It replaced a very similar lower quality image, so I think we can take an exception to the 7-day waiting period. The resolution is high 9700x7900 pixels. It was shot with a medium format camera. The uploader and photographer User:Shonagon works at the Louvre museum according to their Wikidata page.
Articles in which this image appears: Great Sphinx of Tanis
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator: Unknown, Louvre Museum, photographer: Shonagon

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 02:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Has to stay in article for longer for nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Great picture. I think the argument that this replaces a longstanding lesser-quality image is just convincing enough to waive the wait period. At the same time, this isn't a 1:1 replacement of a lower-res image, it's a new photo of the same sculpture from a similar angle, and a week wouldn't have been that long to wait before making the nomination. Since this is the nomination in front of us, I'll support it, but waiting out the week would have been better. Moonreach (talk) 14:24, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Quite good rez of a striking subject. (Crop could be tightened a bit at sides, tho.) – Sca (talk) 15:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the lighting is not great, I understand the subject is in a museum where the photographer does not control the lighting but alas. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wood stork and Yacare caiman[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2024 at 18:11:24 (UTC)

Reason: Featured on Commons two years ago. Not the lead image but illustrates predator and prey.
Articles in which this image appears: Wood stork, Yacare caiman
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Others
Creator: Charles J. Sharp

Support as nominator – MER-C 18:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination. When I snapped the bird I hadn't seen the caiman! Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I think it's too hard to see the darker parts of the bird against the background. Moonreach (talk) 14:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Moonreach - the bird and caiman are indistinct against the background, which limits EV Nick-D (talk) 21:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, great photo! Artem.G (talk) 11:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded what I hope is a better version @Nick-D and Moonreach: Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't notice any difference I'm afraid: the water reflections still make it hard to distinguish the caiman and stork. It's a good photo, but the reflections limit the EV. Nick-D (talk) 21:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's very distinct at full size, and, honestly, a certain amount of blending is probably unavoidable. Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 16:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the better version that has been uploaded, I agree with previous editors that the first version was too indistinct, but it is my belief that this new one is an improvement and the subjects are more clear against the water. Nominator might be well served pinging the previous voters. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 16:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Victorious Youth[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2024 at 18:04:29 (UTC)

Reason: Featured recently on Commons. Objections were due to the nomination being an incoherent set and not the images themselves. Headline image.
Articles in which this image appears: Victorious Youth, Bronze sculpture
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator: Unknown, photograph: The J. Paul Getty Museum

Support as nominator – MER-C 18:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 21:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The church with a magnetic personality[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2024 at 08:55:13 (UTC)

Reason: A really good image with beautiful composition, excellent EV (for both Aurora and the church) and previous nom could not reach necessary quorum with no opposes.
Articles in which this image appears: Aurora and Vík í Mýrdal
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Atmospheric optics
Creator: AstroAnthony in Commons

Support as co-nominator – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as co-nominator --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 13:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. – Yann (talk) 13:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Moonreach (talk) 14:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – 🐱FatCat96🐱 Chat with Cat 03:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as Principle Skinner would approve. – LegalSmeagolian (talk) 22:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ford Strikers Riot[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2024 at 23:34:40 (UTC)

Reason: 1942 Pulitzer Prize for Photography
Articles in which this image appears: Ford Strikers Riot, Pulitzer Prize for Photography, 1942 Pulitzer Prize, Milton Brooks, etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
Creator: Milton Brooks

Support as nominator I found a copy large enough for FPC. Quality is so-so, but this is a Pulitzer Prize winner. – Yann (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:31, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I cleaned more scratches and spots. Yann (talk) 14:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit JPEG-artifacty. A lot of the blurriness is from that Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 17:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – It's an action shot, with expected motion blur, and it's a historic photo. I suspect a higher quality scan wouldn't be much different, so it's a 'Support' for me. Good lead image in the riot article, and it's a Pulitzer winner. Bammesk (talk) 02:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: your last upload on March 31 needs to be fixed. On the center of the image, on the back of the man being hit, there is a long horizontal 'cloned trace'. The previous uploads don't have that. Bammesk (talk) 01:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OOPS. Fixed. Thanks for noticing. Yann (talk) 19:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Tells the story fairly well, but question whether it meets Criterion No. 3, even tho it's 1942. Wartime strikes presumably were widely covered. (Perhaps Ford Strikers Riot should be the first target?) – Sca (talk) 14:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2024 at 19:29:07 (UTC)

ALT 1: Original, TIFF
ALT 2: Original, edited, JPEG
ALT 3: Crop 1, JPEG
ALT 4: Crop 2, JPEG
ALT 5: Crop 3, JPEG
ALT 6: Crop 4, edited, JPEG
ALT 7: Crop 5, AI enhanced, JPEG

Reason: While it is a rather blurry photo, it is the only we will ever have of the single encounter between these two historical figures.
Articles in which this image appears: Civil rights movement, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, ,Civil Rights Act of 1964, African-American history, Black suffrage, The Meeting (play)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
Creator: Marion S. Trikosko

Support as nominator – ―Howard • 🌽³³ 19:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why the cropped one, though? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 20:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The uncropped original isn't present anywhere in the English Wikipedia. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 21:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I don't think this AI-enhancement brought anything useful. Beside this, File:MLK and Malcolm X USNWR cropped (Remini enhanced).jpg is sharper. Yann (talk) 13:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if it's AI enhanced, straight Oppose. There's probably cases for AI usage in restoration - to generate a missing bit of paper texture, say - but the AI tools are not meant for "hit button and you're done" use on archival imagery, and the lack of documentation thereof is a problem Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 21:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't aware the nominated image was AI enhanced in any way. In that case, we could merely replace all instances of the image with the uncropped original. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann, Adam Cuerden, and Howardcorn33:, the nom image is not the AI enhanced version. The AI enhanced version is File:MLK and Malcolm X USNWR cropped (Remini enhanced).jpg and it is clearly distinct when viewed at full size. FYI, on 8 June 2022 an AI version was uploaded Here, but shortly after a few hours it was correctly reverted to the previous non-AI version. I have gone on and uploaded the original TIFF file from the Library of Congress Here, and I have updated the "other versions" fields in all of our now seven versions of this photo. Bammesk (talk) 02:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I prefer This crop, or similar. It is the least distracting. I would vote support if it was created from the full resolution TIFF original (possibly with some adjustments to contrast, etc.). Bammesk (talk) 02:15, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still oppose. I think File:MartinLutherKingMalcolmX.jpg is better. Why not feature the original version? I changed the ~~gallery~~ nom's category. Yann (talk) 11:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure User:Yann meant, diff, the "nomination's category", not "gallery", so I fixed it. Bammesk (talk) 00:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Yes. For me, a category is in the Category namespace. Yann (talk) 09:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Wikipedia should not feature cropped archive images. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:50, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've taken it upon myself to include all variations of the photo and shown it in the gallery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardcorn33 (talk • contribs)

Europa Clipper commemorative plate[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2024 at 18:30:05 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image
Articles in which this image appears: Europa Clipper
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Others
Creator: NASA/JPL Photolab Studio

Support as nominator – Artem.G (talk) 18:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~ Oppose – Visual information not readily intelligible to general readers/viewers. – Sca (talk) 12:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that's why there is a caption that describes what one can see there. Artem.G (talk) 15:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The character of the image influences whether readers choose to read captions. -- Sca (talk) 16:03, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Creative. High quality photo. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 19:31, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:31, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Moonreach (talk) 14:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment lighting seems needlessly uneven.©Geni (talk) 16:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It's distracting. I suppose it's an artistic choice. It would've been better with uniform lighting. Bammesk (talk) 02:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Man[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2024 at 16:43:06 (UTC)

Reason: First and foremost, the EV. It's a high quality image, selcted as the lead image of Man after very rigorous discussion and consensus.
Articles in which this image appears: Man
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People
Creator: Goodfreephotos.com, uploaded by Levivich to Commons

Support as nominator – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Has zero EV. Discussion was not rigorous, just a few self-appointed people who think they have the right to choose this image. Undemocratic nonsense. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose As previously noted, has zero EV. Also not visually interesting, looks almost generated by AI. Under no circumstances should this be a "featured picture". - LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does have a bit of a "passport photo" composition, doesn't it? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 11:06, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a good photo of this person, but not of FA standard. Without even wanting to look into the discussion in the article, it seems odd to only have a single lead image given that huge differences in appearance are one of the features of humans as a species. Nick-D (talk) 21:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – A single image should not be representing a topic as broad as Man. 🐱FatCat96🐱 Chat with Cat 03:46, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

James VI and I[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2024 at 15:51:02 (UTC)

Reason: High quality and resolution. Good digitization
Articles in which this image appears: James VI and I etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Royalty and nobility
Creator: Portrait attributed to John de Critz

Support as nominator – Vinícius O. (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Great digitalization and quality EV. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support — 🐱FatCat96🐱 Chat with Cat 01:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Hamid Hassani (talk) 10:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I disagree this is high resolution, it is only 38 dpi. MER-C 17:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's different colours than the Museo del Prado version. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 11:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leo von Klenze[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2024 at 15:24:01 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality and resolution
Articles in which this image appears: Leo von Klenze etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: Franz Hanfstaengl

Support as nominator – Vinícius O. (talk) 15:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a very good scan, I fear. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 16:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK for a 1856 picture. – Yann (talk) 23:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gustav III, Act III (redux)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2024 at 23:30:39 (UTC)

Reason: Not sure why this failed to reach quorum last month. There's examples - I should prepare one - of the process from this sort of thing to a 3D maquette (and presumably to stage, but the actual stages were rarely photographed; you sometimes got newspaper impressions) and they're clearly stages of a design process, so it's pretty fair to call this a set design.
Articles in which this image appears: Gustave III (Auber), Pierre-Luc-Charles Cicéri
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: Pierre-Luc-Charles Cicéri, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 23:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think you should renominate so soon, Adam. I gave a reasoned argument against the nomination so you shouldn't be unsure why it failed to reach quorum. Not quite the same as my juvenile wombat which just failed - 4 support votes and no negative comments. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. To make this a simple series of points instead of a rant:
1. This is a very standard sort of image for FP status. We've regularly promoted similar artworks for opera - there's seventeen in Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Theatre. Indeed, we promoted one earlier in February.
2. I read your statement; I responded to your statement at the time, and you never commented again. You still haven't clarified your point.
3. Nothing about your previous statement was framed as an objection. It was a comment about whether this counted as a set design, which I responded to both there, and in the introduction here.
4. You did not vote oppose last nomination. There were zero opposes.
5. You've never stated how this being an early stage in the set design - from which we know the final designs were made - ruins its EV.
6. Even if we accept this isn't finished set design but a concept for one, no other parts of the process exist except this one for this opera. It's from 1833; before illustrated newspapers and before photography, and this opera neither has a maquette like File:Marcel Jambon - Giuseppe Verdi - Otello Act I set design model.jpg nor a post-production artwork like File:Luigi Verardi after Dominico Ferri - Gaetano Donizetti - Carrefour de St Jean et Paul. Dans l'Opéra Marino Faliero.jpg (Well, there's this image of a different scene but that has major issues of its own: Stages don't exist in portrait orientation, so its probably much, much more inaccurate and impressionistic than anything under consideration.) As such, this is the most reliable source for the opera.
7. This the only image of his work in Cicéri's article, and I'd say an example of Ciceri's work is of high EV in the other article.
8. I've reviewed every single example of Cicéri's work on Gallica (at least that comes up from a author search by him), and
  - Due, I presume, to when he worked, the vast, vast majority of his work isn't able to be assigned an opera or play.
  - There's not a lot of his more finished works that survive. This, and the unidentified [1] are probably his best surviving work, at least on Gallica. (Ones I'd consider somewhat close are: [2], [3] (unidentified ), [4], [5], [6], [7])
  - In one, and only one case, can I compare one of his works to a post-production lithograph. Now, I wouldn't necessarily trust a lithograph or other published illustratiosn of an opera to be perfectly accurate in pre-photography days, but this set design from Robert le Diable and this lithograph) are similar enough that I'd presume a lot of the differences are down to inaccuracies in the lithograph (after all, it's by necessity an impression of the stage design, probably not actually sketched from the same angle it's presented from) at least as much as any changes in the design later on.
    File:William Waud - Burning of McPhersonville 1865 - original sketch.jpg is what Alfred Waud sent Harper's Weekly. File:William Waud - Burning of McPhersonville 1865 - final Harper's Weekly version.jpg is what got published. Hence why one need be careful about presuming that illustrations from old newspapers or books are perfectly accurate. I'd be more inclined to trust Cicéri's original.
--Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 22:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My oppose here is because I don't think we should be nominating again so soon. There isn't rule against it but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it. I saw your explantion on the first nomination but my comment still stands: 'This is the artist's signed watercolour which was presumably used for the set design. It is not the set design.' So the problem is not the EV of the image, it is the description which the rules say 'Properly identifies the main subject'. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, I don't see how it's any different than any other illustration of the set design. People know it's not a photograph of the stage. Do you disagree that Gallica labels it as a set design? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 15:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 00:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 23:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Moonreach (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 02:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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:

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.
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:

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.
Add the image to:
- Template:Announcements/New featured content - newest on top, remove the oldest so that 15 are listed at all times.
- Wikipedia:Goings-on - newest on bottom.
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs - newest on top.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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}}.
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:

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.
Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the April archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
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:

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.
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.
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:

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.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
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:

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.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
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}}.
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.
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:

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.
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.
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.

Because he wanted to put a little spring, summer, autumn, and winter in someone's mind[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2024 at 15:52:29 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image by Archimboldo, used as prominent works in the artist's page as well as an example of synesthesia in artworks.
Articles in which this image appears: Giuseppe Arcimboldo and Synesthesia in art
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Giuseppe Arcimboldo

Support as nominator – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 23:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 10:06, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 00:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Giuseppe Arcimboldo - Four Seasons in One Head - Google Art Project.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist and replace: Vertumnus[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2024 at 11:17:40 (UTC)

Reason: Replaced with higher resolution image. (Nominator not notified as she is deceased.)
Articles this image appears in: Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) etc.
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Vertumnus
Nominator: MER-C

Replace — MER-C 11:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace – Bammesk (talk) 00:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace – Rest in peace, Corinne. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Back in the day there was a large image viewing tool that I'm not seeing now. The pink warning message doesn't offer a way to view the image full-sized. Brandmeister^talk 14:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace Thanks for proposing this. – Yann (talk) 23:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 00:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace – Hamid Hassani (talk) 02:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced with File:Vertumnus årstidernas gud målad av Giuseppe Arcimboldo 1591 - Skoklosters slott - 91503.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grey-breasted partridge[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2024 at 11:44:13 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC last year, where it was featured unanimously. Illustrates article well (infobox image). Near threatened.
Articles in which this image appears: Grey-breasted partridge
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – MER-C 11:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Good environmental capture, but suggest a moderate crop from right. (Target is a rather stumpy 130 words, but that's probably enough for a copy block.) – Sca (talk) 13:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The environments looks great, but I won't mind a crop either. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support agree about the crop but only the photographer should make the crop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs)

Previous comment posted by MER-C – Sca (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was Charlesjsharp, not me. MER-C 17:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. -- Sca (talk) 16:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 10:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Gray-breasted Partridge 0A2A3088.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Clay[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2024 at 02:38:17 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image used as lead. High resolution, high EV.
Articles in which this image appears: Laura Clay, Gerhard Sisters
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator: Gerhard Sisters, restored by FatCat96

Support as nominator – 🐱FatCat96🐱 Chat with Cat 02:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ – Watermark. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's just th artist's signature. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 11:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I left the watermark to add EV to Gerhard Sisters. If you want me to upload an alt without the watermark, I will. 🐱FatCat96🐱 Chat with Cat 13:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in that (per Adam) case. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Though I'd suggest using the brush tool set to hue in order to fix some colour deviations. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 18:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 00:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - serious damage/artifacts around the face, visible posterisation/JPEG artifacts towards the bottom. MER-C 19:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:MER-C, I fixed the area next to her face (next to her chin), and I restored the pixel level integrity of the nom version to that of the original scan from the source (University of Kentucky). Now the restored (nominated) image differs from the original only in the retouched areas. It's as good as it gets (given the original). User:FatCat96, I took the liberty of taking (and using) your restored version and uploading an updated version on top. I hope you don't mind. Thank you for your restorations and nominations. Bammesk (talk) 01:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remain in the oppose column. That removed the artifacts around the face but the face and neck has the same problem. MER-C 11:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's on the original itself. It looks very much like brushwork to add texture to her skin. Not defects. That’s not something we restore or remove, unless there was a good reason for it. Bammesk (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally signs of image editing that aged poorly Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 02:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian image editing. Like, physical edits to the negative. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 05:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – ―Howard • 🌽³³ 19:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Laura Clay by the Gerhard Sisters, 1916.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:28, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added image to People/Political instead. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:28, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eid al-Fitr prayer at the Taj Mahal[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2024 at 22:19:43 (UTC)

Reason: High quality. Good composition. Good EV. Also it can be featured in the upcoming POTD on the day of the feast.
Articles in which this image appears: Eid al-Fitr
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Religion and mythology
Creator: Iansourav

Support as nominator – ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Way down in the article so not so much EV. Taj Mahal not at its best in this 'side' view with two towers obscured. Charlesjsharp (talk) 00:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~ Oppose – Composition seems quite predictable. Little visual interest or EV – Cf. this pic of the bldg. – Sca (talk) 13:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – per Charles, but mostly per Sca. Also, the blown highlights near the minarets and the overexposed sky. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on EV. The article text doesn't mention the Taj Mahal at all, nor is it clear which part of the text the image is illustrating. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are these colours natural? They look a little oversaturated for the robes Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 01:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:24, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

East End of Rundle and Whitemans Pond[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2024 at 17:30:57 (UTC)

Reason: Recently featured unanimously on Commons, used in the article's infobox.
Articles in which this image appears: East End of Rundle
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator: The Cosmonaut

Support as nominator – The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:30, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice photo but I prefer the one with blue sky. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 11:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support oh wow what a shot LegalSmeagolian (talk) 21:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:East End of Rundle and Whitemans Pond.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:37, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado outbreak of March 31 – April 1, 2023[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 17:45:25 (UTC)

Reason: High EV value. Showcases the historic and third largest tornado outbreak in history (147 tornadoes). Image also satisfies all criteria, including size being 3,507 × 2,480 pixels.
Articles in which this image appears: List

FP category for this image: Maps
Creator: Wxtrackercody

Support as nominator – The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question This appears to be OR by the uploader, rather than data from an 'official' source. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: Its not. All that data is publicly available. NOAA releases all the info about tornadoes (start and end locations with coords), path lengths, strength, and all that on the Storm Events Database or the Damage Assessment Toolkit, where a person and straight up see the exact path and even what structures were hit. The Iowa Environmental Mesonet has every tornado warning (and ever NWS warning for that fact) downloadable publicly. The Storm Prediction Center keeps a detailed record of every outlook issued. They also have a ton of detailed info (like coords for tornadoes reported) and everything like that (March 31 on the SPC). No OR at all. In short, all info is from the U.S. government or Iowa State University. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think it is particularly visually pleasing to look at, it is a bit cluttered and unclear what I am looking at. I understand there will be a blurb with it but I feel like this is not the best of the best. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 22:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – It's informative and hence good EV. Sources are sorted out and looks good to me. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Agree with LegalSmeagolian. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 19:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yinka Shonibare CBE at the unveiling of Hibiscus Rising[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 15:13:18 (UTC)

Alt – crop suggestion (CSS image crop)

Reason: This is my first nomination. For full disclosure, uploading this and other images was made as part of a paid project, see WP:GLAM/LEEDS 2023. However, I think this image is a potential nomination for a Featured Pictures as it fulfills, to my mind, the criteria. 1) It is a high standard - Shonibare is centred in the image, with the sculpture behind, with the wider shot showing the urban setting of the work. 2) It is high resolution. 3) I think it is a compelling image, showing not just a Nigerian artist, but a Nigerian disabled artist, next to their work. The sculpture is the first permanent outdoor piece by Shonibare, which makes it significant. Other images of Shonibare are available, uploaded as part of the same project, however I think the composition here says much about his life and career. 4) It has a free license. 5) The image has EV - it is used (via Wikidata) in articles on ARZ, IG and SV Wikipedias, as well as EN. It enhances Wikipedia's content at the intersection of blackness and disability. 6) It is verifiable, see Hibiscus Rising. 7) I think the file description is good - if not I would appreciate feedback on what else to expand. 8) I am unsure what manipulation was made by the original photographer, but it does not seem to me to be manipulated much. Again I would appreciate experienced voices on this.
Articles in which this image appears: Yinka Shonibare, Igbo WP, EN WP, ARZ WP, SV WP
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: David Lindsay, uploaded by User:Lajmmoore

Support as nominator – Lajmmoore (talk) 15:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wikipedia is not a place for corporate/institutional promotion. Also, you are not supposed to upload other people's photos. What you doing is, I'm sure, well intentioned, but I'm very uneasy about people who are paid to upload images to Wikipedia (via Commons) to support Leeds. This is no FP composition, and needs lots of technical work (perspective/shadows), but that was not what I wanted to talk about. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Charlesjsharp thank you for your comments on the image, I understand better now, and fully accept that the image composition is not quite right for this project. In relation to the other points:
- On paid editing: I volunteer as an editor as well, so understand the unease. However I did look carefully in the FP guidelines to see if this kind of nomination from a paid project was precluded, and couldn't see that discussed. Could you point me to the guideline that I missed? Featured Pictures have already come from paid projects, for exmaple this Talismanic shirt & this view of Japan and this coin of Nader Shah. In comparison, I've made some DYK nominations both as part of paid projects and as an everyday volunteer, and the consensus there seems to be as long as you are open and honest about project you were paid as part of, nomination is OK.
This tutorial is where I got my information from. It states no promotional photos. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In terms of uploading other people's photos - this is an image that was shared under and open licence. Again, I checked the FP guidlines and couldn't see where nominating someone else's image was precluded from this project. I saw that there were many historic images included, as well as images of artworks and objects, where the original artist/photographer isn't (couldn't be due to time passed) involved. Criteria 4 just says an image must be under free licence, it doesn't say that the nominater must also be the original photographer - this mirrors the three nominations above, where people have nominated others' work.
@Charlesjsharp: That page says: "you can’t upload someone else’s [...] promotional photos [unless] the author granted permission for anyone to use, copy, modify, and sell it – by releasing it under a free license", which (poor grammar notwithstanding) is exactly what happened here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very happy to retract this nomination or for it to be as closed due to the composition, thank to the instructive comments made Lajmmoore (talk) 07:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Thanks a lot for uploading and nominating for FP. But as Charles mentioned, the composition of the image is not at par with a featured picture we are looking for. For reference, have a look at WP:FP, especially the people subsection to understand the composition and encyclopedic value we want in an image. It is used as a lead image in an infobox, but it does not represent the subject as it is supposed to. The subject(s) are not well defined and shadows are all over the place. Also, you may look at the other nominations to see how a nomination is framed and how the articles that use the image is mentioned. Thanks and happy editing :) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much @The Herald for these constructive comments. It's a lesson in interpretation for me: from this feedback it sounds like for the people section its more usual portrait kind of images that you're supportive of? Lajmmoore (talk) 07:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I added a crop suggestion Alt. Also suggest a slight level adjust to pull up the darker areas. The sculpture is ~30 feet tall, so I don't mind the wide angle distortion, it's a part of the composition. I see no issues with copyright or promotion. Lajmmoore, usage in non-English Wiki articles isn't relevant. Bammesk (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional Support Alt, if the darker areas are lifted slightly. Bammesk (talk) 00:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted no license on Commons. MER-C 11:21, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MER-C, do you know why it was deleted? I see the stated rationale here, but when I had checked it on Commons (if I remember right), the file page had a CC BY-SA 2.0 license and it had a reviewed-by FlickreviewR bot template. The source link is Here. It's very much the same as this image, copyright-wise. Bammesk (talk) 12:39, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a Commons admin, so I cannot answer your question. MER-C 13:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will ask on Commons. Bammesk (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking this up @Bammesk - I really appreciate it. I believe there was a mistake over on Commons and it is now undeleted Lajmmoore (talk) 23:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that was strange. I reverted the CommonsDelinker bot. Bammesk (talk) 00:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gi Gi the Sea Lion[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 19:22:40 (UTC)

Reason: On technical merits, I think this is a good digitization of a well-composed source image. It's been on the English Wikipedia's page for sea lion for years, and is also used on nine other Wikipedias. (I also think it's kind of charming, personally.) I should be candid in saying that it's 1300px on the short axis, which I know is below the target cutoff. The guidelines said there could by case-by-case exceptions for historical images. Nobody responded when I asked about it on the FPC talk page a month ago, so I guess we'll just have it out here.
Articles in which this image appears: Sea lion
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator: Original photo taken by Bob Borden of Military Sealift Command in the 1980s. (The source caption says only "1983"; the file name says 1984.) Uploaded by Fishdecoy to Wikipedia in March 2008 and then by Mousse to Commons in July 2008.

Support as nominator – Moonreach (talk) 19:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For EV this would have to be in some military article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The subpar resolution and unsharp features doesn't make a good FP impression. Passable EV but the lack of a proper source really bothers me. I couldn't find any original source of the image. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:43, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Snapshot-style pic. fails to illustrate gist of story re recovering rockets. – Sca (talk) 14:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's something I woild feature if there was an article on it. Underwater photography was not much of a thing back then. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.9% of all FPs.} 19:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pioneer plaque[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2024 at 18:41:01 (UTC)

Reason: High quality, high EV. I'm surprised it's not featured, the nomination from 2008 (!) was opposed.
Articles in which this image appears: Pioneer plaque, Pioneer program, Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, Communication, Diagram, Interstellar probe, Linda Salzman Sagan
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Diagrams
Creator: Vectors by Oona Räisänen (User:Mysid); designed by Carl Sagan & Frank Drake; artwork by Linda Salzman Sagan

Support as nominator – Artem.G (talk) 18:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as yeah it is an incredibly interesting, high quality image, also tasteful nudes. - LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – We have a FP of the actual plaque Here. It should be in the Pioneer plaque article IMO. I see more value in the actual photo. Bammesk (talk) 02:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hmm, I missed that, wasn't able to find it in Featured pictures somehow. In that case, I'm withdrawing the current nomination. Thanks Bammesk! Artem.G (talk) 08:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn nomination. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suspended nominations[edit]

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