If this picture became a featured pictures, I hope to place it on June 1, because this picture fits well with Children's Day. Q28 (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Probably a good call not to explicitly identify them. Imagine having your school google your name and you becoming known as Yawn Girl? With the power of making thousands of millions yawn? Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs23:44, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2022 at 03:05:49 (UTC)
Reason
Interesting car brand. From 1993 to 2013 Wiesmann GmbH specialized in producing hand-built custom cars and produced about 180 cars per year. In 2013 the company stopped producing cars and it has been going through business restructuring since then. This photo shows the company's MF 3 model. There wasn't a big variety of models and the MF 3 is a good representation of all models up until 2003. This is a quality photo. FP on Commons.
Comment Nice car, but badly parked. Shiny cars must be like shiny frogs. A nightmare to photograph. As for composition, I'm no car photographer but the tree could be better placed, the windows lowered so we can see into the car and the driver's seat back in position. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: Rarity should probably count for something here. 180 or so cars a year for about 20 years is rare enough, even presuming all survive, that I'm inclined to forgive a bit. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs11:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At the same time, though, if w'reecting this one for background and lighting, one has to ask whether any lighting or background would be acceptable? If it's cloudy, people will reject it for that. If it has other cars in the background, then it would be voted down for that. It feels like we're setting up every possible photo for failure. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs03:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The image obviously possesses an uncommonly powerful symbolic value and as such has acquired iconic cultural status. O'Dea (talk) 00:45, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It would be nice if capitalisation and use of hyphen here was consistent. It's clear that 'white-faced' is correctly hyphenated, but different sources disagree about hyphenating 'storm petrel'. There is no need for capitals in the common name of a species. ProfDEH (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You are not correct ProfDEH in your didactic criticism. Birds Britannica uses White-faced Storm-petrel. American usage favours capitals, British usage is often lower case. Both White-faced Storm-Petrel and White-faced storm-petrel can be used. It is unusual for storm petrel to be unhyphenated, but it is found, and not only on Wikipedia. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By the same logic you would capitalise Fox or Seagull surely. But my objection is mainly that name on the image and in the article are different. ProfDEH (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The use of capitals is usually determines by a publication's style guide. Here on Wikipedia, there is no such constraint. And on the subject of bird names, there is no such bird as a seagull! Charlesjsharp (talk)
Since files from Commons are used on a wide variety of Wikipedias and other projects, trying to standardise that isn't really that doable. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs17:26, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's just shy of 300 words, so there's enough there for an acceptable TFP copy block, but the brevity of the article would probably lessen the TFP chances for this nom. – Sca (talk) 12:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it's borderline Start-class. It has all expected basic information, and a few good sources. It could certainly be better, but it's a bit more than just a stub. SupportAdam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs13:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2022 at 18:25:53 (UTC)
Reason
Renominating this. It was nominated previously but it needed restoration. Isambard Kingdom Brunel, a renowned engineer of the industrial revolution, at the launching of SS Great Eastern (ship designed by him) in 1857. An iconic image of the industrial era of the 19th century. For details see the lead sections of [1] and [2].
Support Good version of a famous and much-used photo. The article on the photo does a good job of explaining its significance, as a rare example from this era of a worksite photo. Nick-D (talk) 07:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I suppose I should weigh in, given that I anchored down the previous nomination with my opposition. Anyway, this is a famous image that we should have a FP-quality version of, and now we do. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:55, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Robert Howlett (Isambard Kingdom Brunel Standing Before the Launching Chains of the Great Eastern), The Metropolitan Museum of Art - restoration1.jpg --ArmbrustTheHomunculus20:40, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone can crop it if they upload it as a different filename. Whether anyone should or not is debatable. Personally I prefer it as is. Bammesk (talk) 13:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2022 at 18:59:27 (UTC)
Reason
Somewhat of a forgotten author nowadays, but with three films based on her work and a photo by the very talented Zaida Ben-Yusuf, who can resist? (I hope that's not setting myself up for sarcastic responses)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2022 at 23:42:04 (UTC)
Reason
Sorry this wasn't ready when TheFreeWorld kindly nominated it, but it's done now. You could argue whether one other image or this one is the best we have of Lockwood, but I think everyone would agree this is the better composed one, just both are valuable in their own way, and this has been stable in her article's lead (despite some pretty distracting damage in the unrestored version) since about 2019.
Comment - can something be done about the shadow at the bottom; it somehow draws your attention away from the photo itself, accentuating the buckling of the cardboard backing - especially since it is not a part of the photo itself... --Janke | Talk10:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't generally like to do so as it makes the image look substantially more artificial when there's a textured background that doesn't quite follow the rules of optics. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs13:26, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – At a mere 88 words, so-called article is a sliver of a stub. Anyway, the image is just a guy in a suit holding papers. (And this user can raise one eyebrow at a time, too.) – Sca (talk) 13:39, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – No EV whatsoever. To quote Bugs Bunny: "Never heard of him - wrong number!" - even though he's a compatriot Finn! --Janke | Talk20:40, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It fails FP criterion #2 1500px requirement. So Oppose. I don't see Janke's EV rationale though. The image adds as much EV to his article as any portrait does to a biography article. Bammesk (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By "no EV" I mean that IMO the whole article is incongruous here in the English-language Wikipedia. Even in the Finnish Wiki, his article is only a stub... --Janke | Talk17:05, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FP criteria doesn't address article quality. My opinion on stubs is in this diff. Weak articles are addressed at POTD guidelines: "if the article chosen to accompany the picture is not up to scratch (...), the appearance may be delayed until there is a suitable article to accompany the picture." Bammesk (talk) 03:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2022 at 17:19:24 (UTC)
Reason
One of the most famous April Fool's pranks ever concocted. I think this would be a great video to show for at least next year. It has great EV for it's page and it overall a funny moment for the BBC.
Support Alt 1 – I uploaded a higher resolution webm version. I converted the higher resolution 640x480px mpeg4 original from the same source [4] to webm. Bammesk (talk) 01:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2022 at 12:56:26 (UTC)
Reason
A few months ago I nominated this image, got one neutral-leaning-oppose (I think) comment and it closed as "not promoted" but perhaps second time is the charm. So, this article has already one featured picture but I think it can have more than one. This image does illustrate three other particular properties of fumarolic minerals that are discussed in sources but are currently not very well illustrated - their multicoloured appearance, the crust-like and how they are deposited on the surfaces of rock cavities. These aspects are discussed in the article but the current lead image does not cover them as well as this one does. Neither image captures all aspects of fumarole minerals perfectly - the current lead image shows the delicate structures better -, but together they cover most aspects of fumarolic minerals. I've expanded the article a little so that it discusses their appearance a bit more.
I looked at the articles of the last 65 flower FPs in the category: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers, (65 takes us back to 2009), and 16 of the 65 have short articles very comparable to the nominated image article (that's 25%). There is no basis in the FP criteria to oppose short articles, just because they are short. All that's needed is the "image adding significant EV to the article" (criterion #5), that's all the requirement there is. My opinion on stub articles is in this Diff. Bammesk (talk) 03:09, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2022 at 18:59:22 (UTC)
Reason
As with the previous nomination, it's a very strong image by an excellent photographer. I redid the restoration as I somehow managed to expand the image the first time. Presumably some consequence of updating GIMP and finding some new feature.
Comment - assuming that these flowers are not on the same plant, isn't the photo slightly misleading? (File text "growing together in the forest" is also open to misunderstanding...) --Janke | Talk19:19, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I edited the article's image caption and rewrote the file description. I don't think it's misleading. There is EV in depicting the color variation. Bammesk (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a lot going for this, but does it seen a bit dark to anyone else, like the Brightness/Contrast is slightly dull? I'll check again when I get home to it less lighting on my tablet, though. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs15:39, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2022 at 12:39:49 (UTC)
Reason
A fine old poster for a fascinating fellow. In the era of orientalism, it was common to make oneself up as an Asian mystic for your magic act. Long Tack Sam (A somewhat loose Anglicisation of Lung Te Shan) was from China. Article on him could be better, but it's not appalling or anything. Un-fun fact: If this passes, this'll only be the fourth person of Asian descent in the whole category. Might have to do a bit of an Asian History Month celebration next month. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs12:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2022 at 02:34:41 (UTC)
Reason
This was nominated previously and had the votes to pass (7 supports). The copyright wasn't clear so I withdrew the nomination. Now it has survived a deletion request on Commons. I renominated it in December [8] but participation was low. I hope this time it passes. See the reason section of the first nomination for why I am nominating it and the lead section of her article.
I can't help but think this is one of those perennially appearing images; I'm sure I've seen some variant of this a few times before. And I think the reason is that it's good, but flawed, and those things war. It's undersized; maybe that's mitigated by the aspect ratio, though. It's pretty grainy; that could well be original. I do think there's reasons it keeps appearing, though, so., although I think the fade-out is a bit over-cooked - no paper texture remains - my inclination is Support, but I'd love to replace this with a better copy one day. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs23:40, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2022 at 00:20:22 (UTC)
Reason
The photo is of high technical standard and resolution. The photo is included in an article of C status and has been recognised with a DYK hook on the front page. The article has a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license, adds value to Wikipedia and is easily verifiable.
Oppose Uninteresting composition, and the railing(?) in the bottom right corner spoils the photo. I note that the photo was taken with an iPhone: for an architecture image like this to be a FP, it would likely need to have been taken with a proper camera to give assurance that it's as high quality a photo as is possible. Nick-D (talk) 23:34, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To be honest, modern iPhones (starting from #7) have amazingly good cameras - I see no blatant focus or aberration problems in this photo. True, the railing mars the composition, but cropping would cut the reflection and mar the composition even more. Weak support because of interesting architecture and high EV. --Janke | Talk09:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2022 at 23:34:58 (UTC)
Reason
A rather nice image of a World War II destroyer, better than most of the ship images I've seen coming out of WP:MILHIST's articles-undergoing-improvement lists for a while. And I wanted something to test out my new laptop with (Thanks, Dad! You really helped out here), so something not ridiculously difficult seemed a good idea.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2022 at 07:28:26 (UTC)
Reason
High quality, high resolution portrait that both depicts the individual as well as the traditional presidential regalia of the country (the presidential sash and —more importantly— the historical medal). High EV as this is the only high resolution, public domain portrait of Mesa during his presidency.
I'm not sure that's a great rule when it comes to underphotographed countries. For America, sure. Bolivia.... Weak Support because the composition of a busy painting behind him weakens it too much for me. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs19:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2022 at 04:10:25 (UTC)
Reason
An iconic Buster Keaton movie that was was one of the first 25 films inducted in the National Film Registry. This might be the best quality of the film on here and definitely has the EV for its respective page.
Can the still be changed to another, recognizable frame from the film? (Say, Keaton sitting on the coupling rod of the loco?) --Janke | Talk15:39, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, when nominating movies here there is not timestamp section in the template. So you can't really add a timestamp until after you make the nomination. GamerPro6421:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2022 at 00:39:50 (UTC)
Reason
A fine poster from the Paris première, and part of my goal to celebrate every Massenet opera. Quite like the portrayal of the characters as Roman statues - it's clever, and visually appealing. Article is kinda stubby, but probably just about long enough; I'll try to bulk it up before the main page. Rotation is kind of a bodge; there's no universal solution - level out the text and the sides are tilted; level out the sides and the bottom is tilted - so I tried for the best compromise.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2022 at 17:42:23 (UTC)
Reason
I don't know how well she's known at FPC, but Penny Richards is a phenomenal researcher who's constantly finding interesting people that deserve more attention to write articles about, and, as such, when she suggested this photo of Jacobson, I was determined to do it. Then took two weeks to do so because I really don't know why; probably made sense at the time. Anyway! It's an excellent photo. I've cropped it a bit - while providing the restored full-size image as well - since photographs of this era were pretty routinely cropped for publication, and I didn't think the bottom half of a framed picture and such were really intended for the final shot. And, as I said, full size image is readily available.
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political seems by far the best. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture doesn't feel as political as some appointments, but it is a political appointment, and everything else she did was clearly political.
I'd say it's too misused in the article. The enhancements were meant to emphasise sediment flows and turbulence - valuable information about the Firth. But it's used in the article as an unexplained, uncontextualised lead image, robbing it of encyclopædic value. Reluctant oppose. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs19:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking the same. I added a more descriptive image caption and cited the source. The image processing by NASA was done to add, and does add, information (a good thing). I might support (I haven't read the article yet). Bammesk (talk) 03:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Caption is much improved, but it still feels odd at best to use a false-colour image as the lead. One may well criticise File:River_Nith_estuary.jpg, but it still gives a reasonably accurate view of the area, instead of making Scotland look like a South Sea isle. This needs a section in the article it supports, and to be next to that section. Don't get me wrong, if it was used for its intended purpose, it would very much deserve FP, and is rightfully an FP on Commons. But it's misleading as used here. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs18:18, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is fixable. Part of photo below horizon (NB: soft masking!) can be selectively adjusted for brightness/contrast/curves. Janke | Talk11:52, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]