Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/February-2018

Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2018 at 16:57:17 (UTC)

Reason

High-resolution picture of a nearly perfect annular typhoon at its peak intensity. NASA’s Aqua satellite captured Typhoon Noru with a pefect angle, presenting an exquisite tropical cyclone. In the picture, the eye is so symmetric and deep; the convective ring looks so compact and smooth, but it does not attach to the monsoon trough. Moreover, the eye and the convective ring are in the golden ratio. When I initially saw the image last July, I was truly touched beyond words. I have checked many beautiful tropical cyclones in Wikipedia, yet none of them is really comparable. Aside from the extremely rare appearance, Noru was the second strongest typhoon of 2017 and the second longest lasting Northwest Pacific tropical storm in history, which ultimately struck Japan.

Articles in which this image appears

Annular tropical cyclone, 2017 Pacific typhoon season, Typhoon Noru (2017)

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather

Creator

MODIS image was captured by NASA’s Aqua satellite and optimized by Meow for solving overexposure.

• Support as nominator –  🐱💬 16:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:13, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: as per what Meow said - Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:19, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - This is a perfect chance for you, eh? Well, i could say as a "YES". - Nino Marakot (talk page) 11:36, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• comment Can you expand on what you mean by "optimized by Meow for solving overexposure"?©Geni (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Geni: As the picture was captured near noon and in summer, sunlight over the area was too bright that even caused significant overexposure. The typhoon itself also enhanced the effect of overexposure as its cloud top was too smooth to have obvious shadows. The original picture looked completely white without optimization. A Himawari-8 animation on that day also revealed how the satellite solved overexposure. 🐱💬 02:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - --위키광역시 (talk) 06:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Noru 2017-07-31 0415Z.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2018 at 09:40:29 (UTC)

Reason

good shot (weather, colors) for depicting this horror place - Jasenovac concentration camp

Articles in which this image appears

Jasenovac concentration camp and many others

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture

Creator

Petar Milošević

• Support as nominator – PetarM (talk) 09:40, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Commment - Wouldn't this have more EV at Stone Flower (sculpture)? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:01, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Commment - I like the daytime shot in the Stone Flower (sculpture) better - more EV i that. --Janke | Talk 07:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Info You can put image there, but my intention is to show Jasenovac logor. These days in United Nations there is opened this exhebition, and Croatian government didn't want it, they try to hide it. Logor is standing in Croatian border between Bosnia and Croatia, huge etermination logor Gradina was part of it. @Janke i dont believe sunny, shiny picture can suit this place. Remember Schindler's list, what color was it? Please read more about it. So country which opened logor and was killing is now protesting, something like Germany would protest against commemorating in Dachau or Auschwitz. In time of Yugoslavia it was always opened, now Croatia close that museum. Chris Woodrich this is not just a picture, it is something more. Should be on main page on commemoration day. Thats is why i put it here. Quality, temperature, colors are more than great for showing this site. --PetarM (talk) 08:45, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No doubt it's a good shot. I'm just not sure it's the best EV for the camp itself. Boelcke Kaserne at Nordhausen, for example, is represented at FP by a contemporary image (warning, NSFW).  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Other parts of Camps in Jasenovac were destroyed, so isn't like some in Poland. We should make some exceptions for Picture of the day, like this and some others, which might not get FP star, but they have bigger relevance. --PetarM (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Are you saying there are no images of Jasenovac from when it was used as a concentration camp? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:56, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Chris Woodrich Actually i havent saw any other structure than this which isnt part of Commons. If you see Commons site for Jasenovac you will see just horror. Those pics are low quality, small resolution, and i doubt poeple here would support voting. --PetarM (talk) 09:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC) p.S. In other case, it was only logor which Nazists didnt control, and Croats didnt do much photos, or destroyed. In any case, Red Army was faster before Germans destroyed them.[reply]

• Support--Ванилица (talk) 09:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support--Sorabino (talk) 22:47, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2018 at 10:26:22 (UTC)

Reason

high image quality, already an FP, VI, and QI on Wikimedia Commons

Articles in which this image appears

Recology, Garbage truck, Cab over

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land

Creator

dllu

• Support as nominator – dllu (t,c) 10:26, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – Little or no EV. Sca (talk) 16:03, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Obvious EV.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Looks quite bizarre without a background. I would consider the unprocessed version if it were used in the articles instead. Kaldari (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose While this is a clear and useful image, I agree that the absence of a background is a problem: professional photos of vehicles tend to have either relevant backgrounds or some kind of neutral backing rather than portraying them as floating in space here. Nick-D (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I were writing a print encyclopedia, I'd definitely use this. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the encyclopedias I had as a child used something similar.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are plenty of professional photos of vehicles with a white background. For example, garbage truck on Getty that is selling for $375. dllu (t,c) 05:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Very nice, clear photo that has no obvious problem areas. The white background actually seems to make this vehicle/photo pop out even more, which is nice. Goveganplease (talk) 15:31, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I see how an artificial background can be distracting, but this being a piece of machinery, not just a vehicle, and this being an encyclopedia I am Ok with it. I see sufficient EV to support. Bammesk (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per my !vote at Commons. Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 5 supports and 3 opposes, and thus no consensus for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2018 at 18:51:12 (UTC)

Reason

High quality image illustrating article well. FP on Commons.

Articles in which this image appears

Common black-hawk

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds

Creator

Charlesjsharp

• Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:51, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Nice pic! Looks good to me, high EV. Mattximus (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Light is a bit harsh, but given the location probably not much you could do. Otherwise the image is excellent  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Good choice of species too. Brandmeister^talk 21:51, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as I did at Commons. Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Cuban black hawk (Buteogallus gundlachii).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2018 at 22:56:51 (UTC)

Reason

High quality image illustrating article well. FP on Commons

Articles in which this image appears

Pied kingfisher

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds

Creator

Charlesjsharp

• Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support You might try to remove noise with focal bracketing (in future). --PetarM (talk) 14:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Not sure what you mean by focal bracketing here. This is a a hand-held shot from an unstable floating platform. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:45, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its not stacking as i do often. It's focal bracketing, if you have it on camera. Means you push button at (say) f/6.3 so it goes f/6.3,f/7.1,f/8 straight (if you put 3 shots, i have 5 also, so is increasing that number). They you set Median stack, getting rid of some noise, while you set the bird on best f. It is some working, but the shot is a keeper. You might move, the background is far from being sharp anyway, erase tool can help (3 shots - 3 layers in a stack). EVen if you are afraid which f would be good, you can still choose just one. Better than putting manual. --PetarM (talk) 16:53, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. Camera does not have that F no. facility but does have night-scene-hand-held which combines 4 images, but too much sharpness is lost with these approaches (such as AEB Automatic Exposure Bracketing) when protographing the hairs and feathers on wildlife. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • An idea: You might simply shoot a burst of 3 to 5 images (most cameras have burst mode), then edit/average out the grain in the background, but keep the best frame of the bird... The slight grain doesn't bother me, so Support. In fact, the spider thread bothers me more... ;-) --Janke | Talk 13:57, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd support a bit tighter crop. Too much of the right side is empty space.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. The lead room on the right is not a problem. dllu (t,c) 05:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• There is no consensus on how much space to leave. See my current FP nomination on Commons where The Photographer argues exactly the opposite to Chris's suggestion!: [[1]]. As long as there is enough space in an uploaded version I think the argument on a portrait is not so important. More important on a landscape-type image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @Dllu: I simply said I'd support a tighter crop. Maybe 150px on the top, 200px on the right, or something like that. I understand the point of lead room. However, given that the subject is static, and the EV of the image is related to its appearance within articles (at thumbnail size), I think that a slightly closer crop would work best on en-Wiki.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:43, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Agree with Chris re tighter crop, especially since background lacks visual information. Sca (talk) 14:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Very happy if someone marks up a suggested crop. I'd then crop the image of the male to suit. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I marked one idea.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Sca: cropped version as suggested by Chris uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:33, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• And if you are croping, than do left side also so tree would start from diagonal. And bird will become a bit biger also. --PetarM (talk) 09:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Would also support Petar's idea.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done another crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:08, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per my !vote on Commons. Daniel Case (talk) 02:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Pied kingfisher (Ceryle rudis leucomelanurus) female.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 00:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Feb 2018 at 04:32:09 (UTC)

Reason

I think it easily meets the quality requirements of 1, 2, and 3. The picture is well formatted and of very high quality. The statue itself does not have huge historical importance, but it is a great example of Roman Discobolus statues. It is a featured and quality picture on Commons, and featured on the Persian wiki.

Articles in which this image appears

Discobolus
Ancient Olympic Games
Barefoot

FP category for this image

Sculpture

Creator

User:Livioandronico2013

• Support as nominator – Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 04:32, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Question - Why isn't this in the Discobolus article?  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  @Crisco 1492: I've added it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:24, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Feb 2018 at 11:29:49 (UTC)

Reason

High EV. Very sharp image. FP on Commons

Articles in which this image appears

Marsh fritillary

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects

Creator

Charlesjsharp

• Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:29, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - caption & description should include which is male/female (now that info is just in image notes). Renata (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Renata Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I think Renata was hoping for this information to be in the image description as well. If you open the image on Wikipedia, you can't see the notes.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Renata Chris Woodrich. Why don't the notes show? Crazy? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The image notes (feature? plug-in?) is only available on Commons. It doesn't carry through to Wikipedia.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:15, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Good quality, useful image. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:15, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - No reason not to support... --Janke | Talk 11:29, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Feb 2018 at 11:37:12 (UTC)

Reason

Very detailed portrait. FP on Commons

Articles in which this image appears

Southern plains grey langur

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals

Creator

Charlesjsharp

• Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Perhaps a bit cool, but good quality.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Warmer version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Composition is slightly unbalanced, can't tell why it feels like that, but how about cutting off about 5% from the right and top? --Janke | Talk 11:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I prefer it with the eyes central and certainly wouldn't want to crop the top. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the top needs cropping, but tend to agree with Janke that the indistinct background (due to shallow DOF) could be cropped somewhat on the right and maybe even a bit on the left. (I find expanses of unfocused background distracting: The eye tends to search for some visual information about variations in the blurry tableau.) Sca (talk) 14:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't see subjective issues of cropping mentioned under Featured Picture Criteria... Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:15, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Of course not - we just told you what we think/feel... Besides, I already supported! ;-) Somehow, I'd like to see the "face circle" centered within the frame - not that it affects EV at all, but would make for a more striking (and larger!) image on the Main Page... --Janke | Talk 18:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Having opined re cropping above, I find the image of animal's face quite striking. Sca (talk) 16:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support©Geni (talk) 21:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Southern plains grey langur (Semnopithecus dussumieri) female head.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2018 at 15:49:07 (UTC)

Reason

One of best ceiling in Siena

Articles in which this image appears

Palazzo Pubblico

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings

Creator

LivioAndronico

• Support as nominator – LivioAndronico ^(talk) 15:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Issues with uneven lighting towards the top. The whole thing isn't quite straight and there is a slight fish-eye effect and the highlights are blown on the lighting. In fairness I can't really see any way of getting a picture of this thing to FP standards without some cleaver post processing and HDR work.©Geni (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• ©Geni It is not issues, it is a dome so logically with a 10 mm wide angle you can notice the spiciness, moreover it is naturally an HDR worked with photoshop as in exif,saluti--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 14:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:17, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2018 at 19:04:28 (UTC)

Reason

An excellent and faithful Google Art Project reproduction of one of George Bellows’ most important early works, on which I intend to commence a new article

Articles in which this image appears

George Bellows, Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art

FP category for this image

painting

Creator

Dcoetzeebot

• Support as nominator – Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Creator is clearly not the bot. You need to link the category to the proper page.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Perhaps it's premature to nominate the photograph before there is a page made for this painting? As it stands now, it has limited EV. But with it's own page it would have very high EV. Mattximus (talk) 18:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Reply I will hop to it in the next few days. Like Gauguin’s Arii Matamoe and Ingres’ Louise de Broglie, Comptesse d’Haussonville, both of which became DYKs with Main Page photos, “Frankie, The Organ Boy” deserves wider Wikipedia notice (I think). Would it be proper here to credit Google Art Project as the Creator of the image, or Bellows himself? (Thanks everyone for their patience and advice, while I gather sources.) Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdrawn Because there’s a delicate dance of timing involved in the DYK process — a new article needs to be of a certain quality, as we all know, particularly in regards to proper sourcing, before it can be considered for DYK (front page “new article” status) — and perhaps because I have a particularly high standard for my own work when it’s something as dear as this particular subject, I’d like to table this FA nomination indefinitely, and hope I may do so “without prejudice”, per the legal term of art, so that I may re-nominate it at a later date without prior objection. At the moment, I don’t have access to academic databases, nor the money for xeroxing a few articles and chapters I’ve consulted over the years in various art historical, medical, and genealogical libraries, which is only to hint that, without giving away what I’ve found (O yes, it certainly qualifies as “Original Research”, and Wikipedia is no place for that), my ambition is to build a veriably-sourced platform article on Wikipedia, based on existing art historical scholarship about this painting, after which I later publish something elsewhere on my own. But that would not be for me to insert, and all this lays years ahead... But to know who “Frankie” really was, the identity of his (Irish) mother and (non-Irish, but... but...) father, and how this his remarkable story relates to, indeed, the VERY first days of narrative cinema (in what we today call “shorts”, shown in the very first pop-up theaters in the neighborhood of Bellows’ painting studio, many blocks from his actual residence)... To think of the storytelling inherent in the visual medium of film, and all that still to cone in this beave new art form, and the diegetic (“diegetic” being just a fancy word for “story-telling”) qualities of the very first music went with it, wholly improvised (as was so batural to Frankie, from his earliest days at the Harmonium, though in his life he could barely write his name and was never able to read, words or music, almost certainly because of the problem with his eyes, b/c he could not see close-up, but also because he fidgeted so when you tried to put a book in front of him and... well, he was never attentive to anything but...but to ANYTHING but music, and sounds, and the comedy of life all around him that could wake at his tocih) now, all that IS a novel. So when you think of the great film composers later to come, from Nino Rota to John Williams and on and on, so many others, think of their progenitors, and a painter eho had the vision to depict Frankie “in the grand manner”, as a figure of royalty, of honor. Think of where film and music were first married, and the “anonymous” musicians who married them. And bear with me, and with the indulgence of an FA nomination prorogued. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Withdrawn nomination. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]