Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/January-2021

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


	Older Archive
	Miscellaneous Archive
2004:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2005:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2006:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2007:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2008:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2009:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2011:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2012:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2013:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2014:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2015:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2016:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2017:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2018:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2019:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2020:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2021:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2022:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2023:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2024:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Scotney Castle

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2021 at 09:34:55 (UTC)

Reason: Good composition, nice quality, high EV
Articles in which this image appears: Scotney Castle, Richard Blount
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: DeFacto

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 09:34, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Sharpest focus appears to be on the nearest waterlilies, not the castle. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I agree, it isn't sharp, particularly the trees at the upper left and right. Bammesk (talk) 19:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The lighting is also unpleasantly harsh for the UK - the EXIF data show it was taken in the early afternoon in summer. Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kefermarkt altarpiece (2)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2021 at 16:32:52 (UTC)

The wing panels
The Annunciation, upper panel of the right wing
Birth of Christ, upper panel of the left wing
Adoration of the Magi, lower panel of the right wing
Death of Mary, lower panel of the left wing

Reason: This set was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears: Kefermarkt altarpiece
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator: Uoaei1

Support as nominator – MER-C 16:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 19:21, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DreamSparrow ^Chat 16:41, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 20:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Kefermarkt Kirche Flügelaltar Verkündigung 02.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Kefermarkt Kirche Flügelaltar Geburt 02.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Kefermarkt Kirche Flügelaltar Anbetung 02.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Kefermarkt Kirche Flügelaltar Marientod 02.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Raspberries

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2021 at 16:41:42 (UTC)

Raspberry
Halved raspberry
Many raspberries

Reason: This set was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously. File:Raspberries (Rubus idaeus).jpg is of much greater resolution than an existing FP File:Raspberries05.jpg, which will be nominated for delisting if/when this nomination succeeds.
Articles in which this image appears: Raspberry, Rubus idaeus
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits
Creator: Ivar Leidus

Support as nominator – MER-C 16:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 19:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DreamSparrow ^Chat 16:41, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 06:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Raspberry - whole (Rubus idaeus).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:27, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Raspberry - halved (Rubus idaeus).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:27, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Raspberries (Rubus idaeus).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:27, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Castel Sant'Angelo (new nomination)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2021 at 21:59:35 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution and quality
Articles in which this image appears: Castel Sant'Angelo
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Thomas Wolf

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 21:59, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support, though some of this night time lighting stuff feels like a current fad, and these ancient structures will pass though this phase and never look like it again, having never looked like this in the past. Of course, I am presuming floodlights are actually making it look this way: If it really looks like, say, File:Castel Sant'Angelo at Night.jpg and this is a long-exposure artistic creation, then I'm not sure. This is kind of a genre of image that's popular now, but I'm not sure how accurate it is. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 10:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – As noted regarding Poznań Town Hall below, such intense nighttime lighting gives the structure an unreal aura. Plus, in this case the castle seems too far away. Tut mir Leid.– Sca (talk) 14:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Trevi Fountain

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2021 at 22:04:54 (UTC)

Reason: High quality
Articles in which this image appears: Trevi Fountain
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Thomas Wolf

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Only used in an image gallery, and, except for the time it was shot, more or less the same perspective as the different lead image of the article. Is there enough encyclopedic value? —David Eppstein (talk) 23:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I do think it's better than the current lead, simply because of the better lighting. But they should be swapped first. Suggest switching and suspending the nom, or renominating later. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 23:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dresden Transport Museum

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2021 at 22:09:52 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution and quality
Articles in which this image appears: Dresden Transport Museum
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Thomas Wolf

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – very detailed, but the perspective looks unrealistic. [2], [3], [4] Bammesk (talk) 02:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Agree with Bammesk. Plus, too much foreground, nach meiner Meinung. – Sca (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Florence

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2021 at 22:31:19 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution
Articles in which this image appears: Hurricane Florence (2000), 2000 Atlantic hurricane season
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
Creator: NASA

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support – Bammesk (talk) 01:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's some diagonal scan lines visible. Is this inevitable? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 06:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From what I could find the scans are about 10km wide and 1.5 seconds apart [5], so some of it is inevitable I suppose due to turbulent conditions. I checked the last 6 hurricane FPs [6] and 4 of them have similar scan lines, but more muted and not as obvious. I hadn't noticed them on this image, they are pronounced, I changed my vote to weak support. Bammesk (talk) 02:57, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll Weak support as well, then. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 17:15, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – All satellite pix of hurricanes look more or less the same to me. What's 'best' about this one? – Sca (talk) 14:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Featured contents (FA, FP, FL) are about article quality (or improvement). This image is nominated as the 'best' depiction of this hurricane in the context of improving its article (adding EV to an article and helping readers understand an article). Bammesk (talk) 04:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Desert rose (crystal)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2021 at 20:40:58 (UTC)

Reason: An encyclopedic depiction of Desert rose (crystal), a rose-like formation of gypsum crystal. The crop is a bit tight but that seems to be a common feature of many such images. It's a sharp image and shows the details well.
Articles in which this image appears: Desert rose (crystal), Mineral, Crystal habit, Gypsum
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Geology
Creator: Didier Descouens

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 20:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 06:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 11:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - great detail. If anyone is seriously bothered by the crop it could be easily edited to add a little more black within the FP rules. TSP (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support although I feel the lighting is a little over-dramatic.©Geni (talk) 21:44, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Roses des Sables Tunisie.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Garden in Pelléas et Mélisande

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2021 at 00:54:04 (UTC)

Reason: While a little under-sized, it's a lovely image that really captures the character of Mélisande. The pose, and having her hair down, makes this very obviously Act III, Scene 1.
Articles in which this image appears: Mary Garden, Pelléas et Mélisande (opera)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: Davis & Eickmeyer, N.Y.; restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.7% of all FPs} 00:54, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Gnosis (talk) 00:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miguel de Unamuno

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2021 at 20:37:34 (UTC)

Reason: Good depiction of Miguel de Unamuno, a notable Spanish literary-intellectual in early 20th century and rector of the University of Salamanca for 30 years.
Articles in which this image appears: Miguel de Unamuno
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: Agence Meurisse, restored by JLPC

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 20:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unable to find this image on Gallica. Is there a typo in the name there? As for the image itself, it's not terrible, but compared to the photos of him I could find on Gallica, looks to be very high contrast, and it cuts off a bit oddly. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 18:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adam, I couldn't find it earlier either. I did another search and found it here. (I searched for "Agence de presse Meurisse", then used refine option with "Miguel"!) Bammesk (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bammesk: Good work! Think it could maybe do with a levels adjustment, possibly a crop as well, but there's a decent photo in there. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 18:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adam, there is a tighter crop here. Feel free to introduce a CSS image crop as an Alternate. Personally I like the nominated crop because it shows the full length of his coat (it hints at the fashion of the time). I'll look into adjusting the levels. Bammesk (talk) 04:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I adjusted the levels slightly. I didn't want to stray far from the original. Bammesk (talk) 03:29, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:38, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vernon Jordan Voter Education Project

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2021 at 06:43:37 (UTC)

Reason: Compelling high-quality historical image of an influential figure and program in the Civil Rights Movement.
Articles in which this image appears: Vernon Jordan, Voter Education Project, Southern Regional Council
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
Creator: Warren K. Leffler; restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Technically the photo has several problems (not sharp, distortion, etc.), but it is used well in 3 articles, and is somewhat historic. I'll touch up the photo and remove the minor spots if there is support for the nom. Bammesk (talk) 01:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I hope you don't mind that I touched it up a bit (Sorry, Bammesk! Didn't see you had said you wanted to do it until after!) Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 17:19, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 09:31, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good EV, and the photo is fairly well executed - especially the very strong composition. Nick-D (talk) 10:08, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~ HAL333 04:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Vernon E. Jordan working on a voter education project.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tay Anderson

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2021 at 20:42:03 (UTC)

Reason: High-quality profile shot of a young politician sporting his unique and distinctive look. Light blue background isolates Anderson and likely is supposed to signify his affiliation with the Democratic Party. Has high value at Tay Anderson. Uploaded by Anderson or his campaign under CC-BY-SA-4.0, cropped by me.
Articles in which this image appears: Tay Anderson
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: User:TayAndersonCO

Support as nominator – AllegedlyHuman (talk) 20:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I like the image, but the crop is kind of a "Yearbook" crop - no headspace, and quite tight all around. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 16:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not a compelling portrait IMO. He isn't making a connection with the camera, and there is nothing in the composition to make up for it. Bammesk (talk) 03:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. maybe good enough for the end of a yearbook. --Gnosis (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:01, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy Hield

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2021 at 07:23:12 (UTC)

Reason: Compelling high-quality action shot of basketball player Buddy Hield.
Articles in which this image appears: Buddy Hield, 2016 NCAA Men's Basketball All-Americans, Best Male College Athlete ESPY Award, 2016 NBA draft, List of Bahamians
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Sport
Creator: ChristopherM01

Support as nominator – AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support original. I think the Alt is much too tight, but could support a looser crop. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 16:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT croped is better. --Petar Milošević (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support either prefer Original. Bammesk (talk) 04:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support either prefer original. MER-C 09:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support either or original --Andrei (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Buddy Hield.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:10, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a rough consensus that the original should be promoted. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:10, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Washington, D.C. An instructor of the Capitol Transit Company teaching a woman to operate a one-man streetcar."

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2021 at 16:34:41 (UTC)

Reason: Quite a nice little documentary image for the takeover of traditionally male jobs by women during World War II, by a notable female photographer.
Articles in which this image appears: Esther Bubley, American women in World War II
FP category for this image: You could probably argue a few, but perhaps Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II?
Creator: Esther Bubley, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 16:34, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Extremely unpleasant composition, tilt, shadows, messy foreground etc. Not one of Wikis "best", at least not visually. --Janke | Talk 09:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – A historic moment, perhaps, but of middling import. Cluttered composition and suboptimal framing detract from EV. – Sca (talk) 13:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haliotis kamtschatkana

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2021 at 02:37:30 (UTC)

Reason: Shows the subject well. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Haliotis kamtschatkana
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Molluscs
Creator: H. Zell

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 02:37, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent EV. --Janke | Talk 18:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to be shell-shocked, have a look at the author's page here: [7]. ;-) --Janke | Talk 18:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very heavy work, but very good result ...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 18:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 14:22, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lemonreader (talk) 05:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Haliotis kamtschatkana assimilis 01.JPG --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:22, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Old Town Square, Prague

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2021 at 19:52:43 (UTC)

Reason: Nice view of the square and city. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Old Town Square, Czech Republic
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator: Alexander Savin

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 19:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: A bit outdated now without the restored Marian column. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:19, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: great perspective. cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 12:16, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn't reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Counting of the Omer

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2021 at 16:25:33 (UTC)

Reason: good quality and ev
Articles in which this image appears: Counting of the Omer
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Religion and mythology
Creator: Baruch Zvi Ring

Support as nominator – Andrei (talk) 16:25, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:35, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 09:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems to have a fair bit of artefacting atop a really impressive artwork. I think it might be over-zoomed, given the museum itself offers a very slightly smaller download that lacks any of the issues. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 08:59, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ive uploaded the museum version. It is, indeed, very very similar --Andrei (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 00:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Baruch Zvi Ring - Memorial Tablet and Omer Calendar - Google Art Project.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paratroopers at the Western Wall

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2021 at 09:18:26 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality reproduction of this notable photograph.
Articles in which this image appears: Paratroopers at the Western Wall etc
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/War
Creator: David Rubinger

Support as nominator – MER-C 09:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 13:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Severely blown highlights on wall, focus is on helmet, not faces. --Janke | Talk 15:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, leaning support This photo is genuinely iconic, and our article on it notes the rushed, crowded and somewhat chaotic conditions the photographer took it in, which explains the issues around composition, etc. I also don't see a problem with the focus being on the helmet - this is an image of combat soldiers involved in capturing the Western Wall taken shortly after it was captured during a war. I do wonder if this is the best possible digital version of the photo though given that the image is now PD - the highlights on the wall are blown, but if this was the case in the original negative there's not much we can/should do about it. Nick-D (talk) 23:10, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It comes from http://gpophotoheb.gov.il/, the National Photograph Collection of the Government Press Office. It is the primary source for the archive, therefore I don't think getting a better version is possible. Other versions also have very bright areas. --Andrei (talk) 14:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:23, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 17:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 03:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:צנחנים בכותל המערבי.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kumquats

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2021 at 09:54:32 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC just now, where it will be featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears: Kumquat
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits
Creator: Ivar Leidus

Support as nominator – MER-C 09:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I always wondered what a kumquat was. – Sca (talk) 14:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Bammesk (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 17:45, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, fifth support coming up. --Janke | Talk 17:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lemonreader (talk) 05:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--A.889 (talk) 15:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I struck this vote, editor has less than 100 edits. (per instructions on top of this page) Bammesk (talk) 04:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Kumquat from Spain.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothea Lange and a 1932 Ford

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2021 at 23:15:24 (UTC)

Reason: An restored image. Nice composition.
Articles in which this image appears: Dorothea Lange, Rondal Partridge, 1932 Ford, Technological fix
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator: Rondal Partridge

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 23:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – That's not a '32, it's a '34. – Sca (talk) 14:09, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article says it's a '33... --Janke | Talk 23:32, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it could be either a '33 or a '34, but it's definitely not a '32 – a famous model year to car afficionados. – Sca (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The EV in the articles this is used seems weak (for instance, it's been selected as a random car photo in the Technological fix article for some reason). A crop from the photo is used in the infobox at Dorothea Lange, which makes it difficult to include this version there if it depicts Lange on a notable trip which would be where the real EV is. Nick-D (talk) 01:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I added it to her article. It relates well to a major part of her career as a traveling photographer. It also has good EV in Rondal Partridge's article, the photographer and her mentee (assistant) over the course of their travels. By the way she is holding a large format camera. Bammesk (talk) 04:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:37, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Original New Yorker cover

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2021 at 06:22:54 (UTC)

Reason: Historically and aesthetically significant, recently entered the public domain
Articles in which this image appears: The New Yorker
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Artwork/Literary_illustrations
Creator: Rea Irvin

Support as nominator – PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 06:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Some of the visible imperfections (e.g. creases near the spine) add to the authenticity of the image without really detracting from its content, and given the quality of the original print I'm not sure that higher resolution is really necessary. But I'm a bit concerned about the jpeg artifacts visible in most of the shaded areas, their sudden disappearance into blur in the hat, and what look like unsharp masking artifacts near the contrasty parts of the image. I think maybe it's been a bit overprocessed. Is this really the best scan available? —David Eppstein (talk) 07:50, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source also says it's a reprint from the 50s. It feels way under-documented. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 08:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Artifacts are probably from halftone screen interference and filtering, rather than jpg. --Janke | Talk 12:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If its a reprint from the 50s, would that mean its not in the public domain? GamerPro64 05:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., exact copies of public domain materials do not have copyright protection. PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 08:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Has been reproduced a great many times, becoming a visual cliché. – Sca (talk) 13:45, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:24, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

St. Gilgen

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2021 at 09:06:18 (UTC)

Reason: Great photo, high quality and high EV
Articles in which this image appears: St. Gilgen
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator: Arne Müseler

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 09:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Stable and appropriate lead image for a notable location, depicts the location well, high resolution and sharp, no technical flaws that I could spot. The boat coming in to the dock brings some nice action to an otherwise-static scene, draws the eye into the composition, and prevents the centering of the town from being problematic. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:29, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 08:27, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 14:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lemonreader (talk) 05:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--A.889 (talk) 15:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I struck this vote, editor has less than 100 edits. (per instructions on top of this page) Bammesk (talk) 04:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Sankt gilgen 2018 1.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Warming stripes

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2021 at 12:23:24 (UTC)

Reason: Data visualisation that had a notable, high impact on the world (see its article). Simple, but extremely effective - and goes to the core of what en.wp FPC is about.
Articles in which this image appears: Warming stripes etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Others
Creator: Ed Hawkins (climatologist)

Support as nominator – MER-C 12:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support original or alternative. MER-C 15:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would actually prefer the version with the yellow dots & curve, giving a better understanding of the trend. Of course, an SVG version of that would be even better... --Janke | Talk 12:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will support the consensus version. --Janke | Talk 17:39, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support version with dots but with the same colours as the original (current colours appear more saturated). cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 12:14, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support any, prefer Original because currently it's in the infobox. Bammesk (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support original Which has become an iconic image. Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support original or svg --Andrei (talk) 00:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support the alt, or any. --Gnosis (talk) 18:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support either one of the images Lemonreader (talk) 04:59, 10 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Promoted File:20181204 Warming stripes (global, WMO, 1850-2018) - Climate Lab Book (Ed Hawkins).png --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) train

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2021 at 04:48:26 (UTC)

Original – A nine-car Bay Area Rapid Transit train made of four C-type cars and five B-type cars. The B cars have identical windows at both ends and are strictly passenger cars. The C cars have an operator cab at one end, with narrower window, and can be used as an end car (i.e. control car).

Reason: Detailed image of a Bay Area Rapid Transit train. The image is captured with a line scan camera. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Bay Area Rapid Transit, Bay Area Rapid Transit rolling stock
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator: Dllu

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 04:48, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting method of photography. Could be added to Strip photography article. --Janke | Talk 11:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support as creator. Thanks for the nomination! dllu (t,c) 20:01, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 22:04, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 11:54, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--A.889 (talk) 15:34, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I struck this vote, editor has less than 100 edits. (per instructions on top of this page) Bammesk (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Line scan photo of nine car BART C1 train in 2017.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:29, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orson Welles post-The War of the Worlds broadcast

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2021 at 05:45:07 (UTC)

Reason: The image itself is of high-quality and gives context and EV for how much mass hysteria the broadcast of War of the Worlds caused, to the point Welles had to be interviewed to clarify the intent of the program. Part of an otherwise historical moment in radio.
Articles in which this image appears: Orson Welles, The War of the Worlds (1938 radio drama), Mercury Theatre, 1938 in science fiction
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment (maybe)
Creator: Acme News Photos

Support as nominator – GamerPro64 05:45, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Documents a momentous, historical occasion. --Janke | Talk 13:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Cluttered to say the least. – Sca (talk) 16:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't that perfectly convey the situation? According to the article, Welles was overrun by reporters... --Janke | Talk 11:26, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. MER-C 12:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:49, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- mcshadypl ^T ^C 06:06, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Petar Milošević (talk) 15:24, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Orson Welles War of the Worlds 1938.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Hawley

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2021 at 22:58:58 (UTC)

Reason: High-quality, compelling portrait of US senator Josh Hawley, an important figure in American politics right now and likely to come. High EV to Hawley and related articles.
Articles in which this image appears: Josh Hawley, 2018 United States Senate election in Missouri, 2016 Missouri Attorney General election, List of United States senators from Missouri, United States congressional delegations from Missouri, List of new members of the 116th United States Congress, Religious affiliation in the United States Senate
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Rebecca Hammel, U.S. Senate Photographic Studio

Support as nominator – AllegedlyHuman (talk) 22:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose another official portrait. --Gnosis (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Now is a very poorly chosen moment to feature a picture of him as composed, official, and patriotic. It sends a message of non-neutrality, regardless of whether such a picture might be appropriate in other circumstances. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unremarkable official portrait, basically a decent yearbook photo. XOR'easter (talk) 01:30, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Genuine Q here: how would the majority of FP political portraits not also be considered "yearbook photos?" I'm trying to understand your rationale for opposing. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – per all above. Bammesk (talk) 05:09, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – per all above. --Janke | Talk 11:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Per previous. And given the current U.S. political climate, it smacks of hype/POV. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 16:31, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment As the nominator, I feel obligated to say this nomination wasn't POV, and I'm not too keen on personal attacks suggesting otherwise. To be frank, I don't like Hawley myself. This merely came about when I was editing the page and remarked to myself "huh, that's a pretty good photo." Nothing more. However, given the wide backlash against this nom, I can see this clearly wasn't the time. I'd suggest potentially reviewing policy to include something about if a subject is controversial or the subject of a current political event, as I could not find anything regarding that myself, and yet the majority of votes have something to do with that. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a personal attack – a comment on the import of the photo given the current climate. "Smacks of" doesn't quite mean it's intentionally POV, it means that in the current circumstances it could be interpreted as POV; a connotation rather than a denotation. (Besides, it's a boring official photo.) – Sca (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - If you want a policy to review, I suggest the one I alluded to in my comment above: WP:NPOV. In ordinary times, an anodyne portrait portraying a politician as a normal if boring-looking human person would be neutral enough. These are not normal times, and that portrayal is (one hopes, temporarily) not a neutral one. It is telling the world "we think that this portrayal of Hawley, and not the one of him raising his fist in support of a fascist coup attempt, is how people should be thinking of him right now, and it's so important that you forget that other image that we're going to take the step of promoting the non-fascist image to our front page". Is that really what you think we should be saying? —David Eppstein (talk) 05:28, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Let me make my views on the subject clear once again. I do not like Josh Hawley. In fact, I shouldn't need to tell you this, but I in fact voted against him, twice, and in a large sense, I am sympathetic to what you are saying. However, after reviewing other photos that have been passed as FP, I do not believe that this standard you are proposing here has been equally applied at all. There are, right now, profiles of Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and Andrew Jackson that have all passed FP, all of which depict their respective subjects as sage and statesmanlike. Why can't this same principle be applied to a sitting, democratically elected U.S. senator? Sure, Hawley has a now-infamous (and copyrighted and non-free) image of him raising a fist, but these figures surely have photos of mass graves and other atrocities that would reflect their tenures more accurately, and yet WP has decided to depict them this way in their infoboxes and even the Main Page. Additionally, an image on perhaps the most contentious issue in modern politics, depicting a slogan that would surely make some sensible people's blood boil, was allowed to go on the Main Page as well, because WP editors chose to ambivalently decide FP status based on the quality of an image. All I am asking is for this image to be treated the same. Some editors have done this, and I applaud them (though I would like more clarification on XOR'easter's "yearbook photo" comment, out of genuine curiosity). However, what many of you have shown me is that a fair, unbiased assessment of whether or not this image is of FP quality is not possible at this time, and as such I am calling on Armbrust to speedily close this nomination as well. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Night in Luna Park, Coney Island (1905)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2021 at 17:55:40 (UTC)

Reason: High quality. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Luna Park (Coney Island, 1903). Coney Island, Frederic Thompson, List of defunct amusement parks in the United States, Night photography
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Detroit Publishing Company

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 17:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment There are white sports in the sky. Given the general exposure I'd be surprised if they were stars.©Geni (talk) 16:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tenerife airport disaster - wreckage

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2021 at 04:57:31 (UTC)

Reason: This shows the aftermath of the deadliest aviation incident in history, where two Boeing 747s collided in a Spanish airport on March 27, 1977, causing 583 fatalities. Somewhat of a historical value and a detailed image. Could be reasonably restored, if needed.
Articles in which this image appears: Tenerife airport disaster
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Air
Creator: Unknown, but was donated to the Dutch National Archives

Support as nominator – Lemonreader (talk) 04:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – It needs restoration in the sky area. I am not sure about the copyright, source page says copyright holder is unknown, I see no specifics about Creative Commons CC0. Bammesk (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:17, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow-throated miner

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2021 at 12:15:26 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears: Yellow-throated miner
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – MER-C 12:15, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:25, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Janke | Talk 18:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--A.889 (talk) 15:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I struck this vote, editor has less than 100 edits. (per instructions on top of this page) Bammesk (talk) 03:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I probably would have nominated it eventually. JJ Harrison (talk) 04:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —kallerna 18:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Yellow-throated Miner - Sturt National Park.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:33, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Storming of the United States Capitol

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2021 at 18:27:13 (UTC)

Reason: The picture is some impressive photography that shows off the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. Currently in that article's infobox, greatly improving said article.
Articles in which this image appears: 2021 storming of the United States Capitol, 117th United States Congress
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
Creator: Tyler Merbler (on Flickr)

Support as nominator – Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 18:27, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dark and fuzzy, doesn't really show any action. --Janke | Talk 18:51, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – It isn't sharp for a heavily photographed event. Also the primary article is in flux, so the image isn't necessarily stable there (FP criterion 5). Bammesk (talk) 04:52, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- mcshadypl ^T ^C 06:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. An important event, certainly one with plenty of encyclopedic value to lend to its images, but I don't think this photo is very informative. The level of quality is unsurprising for impromptu news photography, but an image needs to be sufficiently iconic to rise above that and be featured, and I don't think this one is. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:02, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pithecopus rohdei

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2021 at 02:16:28 (UTC)

Reason: Interesting photo, Commons picture of the year in 2017. I expanded the article some, hopefully it will get more attention.
Articles in which this image appears: Pithecopus rohdei, Wikimedia Commons
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians
Creator: Renato Augusto Martins

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 02:16, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose This image has a 'Photoshopped' background and may have been created using string to hold the frog's leg up in the air. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:17, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about that? --Janke | Talk 17:56, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This was discussed on Commons, the photographer described what he did and it passed unanimously. Charles participated and said "fine work". The background is dark because it was shot at f/22 with a (remote) flash. About "maybe string holding the leg up": I uploaded a frame from this GIF, see top view here. This is a natural pose. The forward elbow has a slight bend which wouldn't show in a lateral view. Bammesk (talk) 02:29, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I remember the discussion, though I should not have said fine work. Reading a Google translate of the photographer's comment he admits that it was a complicated set up shot. It is not natural. The photographer's comments explain how it was staged Petar Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well i hope they did not "torture" that animal for a picture. That should be prohibited. I dont understand why f/22 was used, on f/14-16 would be more than enough. Despite that ~~Support~~, unless some other show up (staged etc.). --Petar Milošević (talk) 09:24, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know that, despite my support vote there, but i did not read further text. So put one there, and they will fight for place, as someone mentioned. What is bad it become POTY, and even more bad, we had two crippled birds (from London) as POTY too. Those birds were tortured and could not fly. I remove my support vote. --Petar Milošević (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I google-translated the photographers comments: Hello everyone, thank you very much for the messages and doubts. I will try to clarify all the points questioned. Yes, the animal is wild and free-living. The technique used for this type of image with a black background is very simple, however very laborious. As previously mentioned by the colleague, in the EXIF of the photo it is possible to observe the f / 22 which would be quite high! with the foreground well lit and the background in shadow or dark, we managed to make the background very black. Allied to this, we can see in the image that there is practically no shadow in the amphibians, this is the most difficult part of the photograph! There is no information in the EXIF about the light source, as I use an external flash, attached to a flash radio. That alone would be enough for a black background, but to have no shadow in the image I used 3 light beaters, making the light soft and pleasant! The position of amphibians is completely natural in their habitat. Above all the Clado Phyllomedusidae, presents species that walk slowly and jump little, in the photo in question, a male disputes the branch with another male, when passing over him, an amphibian lowers itself as a form of defense as the other crosses, everything this lasted for about 4 seconds, making the image even more challenging! I hope I have helped, I am always available for further clarification. Renato Augusto Martins So this looks and feels genuine to me, and I've seen videos of frogs taking slow steps just like seen here. The link to the "faked frogs" doesn't show natural postures. Just my 2 €-cents... --Janke | Talk 17:01, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The translation says "very laborious". In the wild, no frog is going to hang around while a photographer does everything he says he did! It is a set up shot. 100%. He says so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per discussion above, and the likely suggestion that this has been staged. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:58, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reply – So it's not photoshopped and strung (frogs weren't forced and tortured). Now the oppose rationale is "staged" and "not in the wild". Several things: 1- Using the word "staged" on a frog implies undue manipulation (drugs, strings, etc). In this photo the frogs are doing what's natural to them. The photographer says so and I think we all agree on that. 2- A remote flash-plus-reflector isn't complicated these days, it could be a bit more elaborate than this. It doesn't mean a complicated setup. 3- The photographer has a track record with frogs-and-flash on flickr in 2010 here, more recently on Commons here. I enlarged his Commons photos and checked the catchlight, he uses flash-plus-reflector on many [8], [9], [10], [11], [12] +more, and flash on almost all photos. I think it's likely his shots are at a research university, animal sanctuary, zoo, etc. (on a sidenote, we don't have a policy or a precedence to oppose solely on that) 4- Yes the photographer says it's "very laborious", and he also says it's "very simple" in the same sentence. As Janke says: these are my 2 €-cents. Bammesk (talk) 03:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

so you agree, staged! Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the 39 supports on Commons, which includes you, so I agree with your vote on Commons. Bammesk (talk) 04:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC) . . . . I agree the frogs are doing what's natural to them. I agree there was no undue manipulation (drugs, strings, etc). He said the frogs are wild and free-living, he didn't say he shot this in the wild. I think he had time, he knows what frogs do, he was hoping he get a good shot and he got it. I think he is legit, he doesn't do fake shots. I think you want to oppose, first fake background, now "staged" as a synonym for fake. By the way "not in the wild" and "staged" are not sufficient oppose rationales, we are an encyclopedia, not a wild life magazine. Example: [13] Bammesk (talk) 05:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The photo has considerable artistic merit. But this is not Commons. You believe an encyclopaedia should celebrate a photo which purports to be natural, but where the frog must have been placed on the branch by the photographer's assistant? I don't agree. I know quite a lot about frogs' behaviour. Do you? I was eventually happy last time as I had not read the English translation of the photographer's explanation of the lengthy set up. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:57, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You actually supported this twice on Commons, once before [14] and then after [15] reading the photographer's explanations. So you think this is a well-done shot: technically, humanely (since you know frogs), compositionally, etc. I don't know frogs but handling this type is easy [16]. They could have been placed on the branch. I am Ok with "well done" set up shots, we are an encyclopedia, and animals aren't an exception. I don't see undue manipulation in capturing this photo, so I am Ok with it. I see the frogs having a natural dispute. I don't see cruelty, given the unanimous supports on Commons including your support there. Bammesk (talk) 05:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – Looks artificial, staged, faked. – Sca (talk) 16:12, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Faked? Frogs do move in funny ways... example: [[17]] --Janke | Talk 19:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm inclined to agree with Bammesk. --Muhammad(talk) 06:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Me, too. Frogs move just like that, so the posture is certainly not artificially staged, even though the "complicated" flash setup can be called "staging". I think this discussion went off the rails due to the first oppose (now struck), and is worth reconsidering by opposers. I see no reason this "climbing over" could not happen in the wild, without any interference at all (such as photographer placing frog/frogs on a branch - and we even don't know if that happend). --Janke | Talk 14:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The flash isn't complicated, his camera and flash have wireless built-in [18] [19]. The frogs are ~1.8 inch [20], image width is ~4 inch, lens is 105mm, so camera is ~1.5 ft away. Looking at the catchlight I am pretty confident it's 3 surfaces, as opposed to 3 reflectors; something like 4.5x1.5 ft in area folded into 3 sections, not as small as I previously thought. According to the file description [21] this was shot at the Michelin Reserve in Brazil, which is a protected nature reserve and research area [22]. Bammesk (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good photo of frogs in action; I haven't seen any evidence that this is unacceptably staged, and the photographer has explained in some detail how it was taken. TSP (talk) 17:39, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All I can say is ribbit! – Sca (talk) 17:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:49, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:49, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vysotsky

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2021 at 00:42:54 (UTC)

Reason: Good composition. High quality
Articles in which this image appears: Vysotsky (skyscraper)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: A.Savin

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Perspective looks distorted/exaggerated. – Sca (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I am Ok with the perspective, the edges of the building are vertical. The foreground/bottom is a bit too chaotic though. Bammesk (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Stephen's Church, Negombo, Sri Lanka

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2021 at 00:56:38 (UTC)

Reason: Good composition and ilustration.
Articles in which this image appears: Saint Stephen's Church, Negombo, List of Archaeological Protected Monuments in Gampaha District
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: A.Savin

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Perspective looks distorted/exaggerated. – Sca (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No wonder, with a 13mm lens... ;-) --Janke | Talk 14:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Baker's Falls

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2021 at 01:04:01 (UTC)

Reason: Good composition. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Baker's Falls, List of waterfalls of Sri Lanka
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator: A.Savin

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 01:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Subject fully in shadow. —kallerna 08:13, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose would have more EV if taken under different light conditions (t · c) buidhe 04:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - It's even possible the falls are never fully sunlit due to the terrain, and with only partial sunlight, the photo would look a lot worse. The lit background gives a dimension not possible in overcast light. --Janke | Talk 17:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:39, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Galle Lighthouse

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2021 at 00:48:33 (UTC)

Reason: High quality.
Articles in which this image appears: Galle Lighthouse
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: A.Savin

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 00:48, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Perspective looks distorted/exaggerated. – Sca (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I agree it looks distorted but it works IMO, good lighting, some history, even a marine radar next to it! Bammesk (talk) 21:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wow (talk) 09:51, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:SL Galle Fort asv2020-01 img24.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kourion

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2021 at 01:18:35 (UTC)

Reason: Good composition. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Kourion, List of World Heritage Sites in the United Kingdom, Romanization of Anatolia
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator: A.Savin

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 01:18, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 20:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support (t · c) buidhe 04:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Episkopi 01-2017 img06 Kourion.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Big Parade

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2021 at 14:08:27 (UTC)

Original – The Big Parade, King Vidor's acclaimed 1925 silent war film

Reason: This is a high-quality reproduction of the now-public domain silent film The Big Parade, featuring the most complete runtime available. (The 1931 score by William Axt is still copyrighted and is thus not included in the file.)
Articles in which this image appears: The Big Parade, King Vidor
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
Creator: King Vidor

Support as nominator – PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 14:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This upload was done less than a week ago. Also I'm not sure if it not having the score hinders it to be a Featured Picture. GamerPro64 05:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Besides the low bitrate (621 kbps at the time of the upload), the video resolution (480p) is particularly low compared to the Blu-ray source. I assume the upload is a direct conversion of the .mp4 file (754.4 MB) from the archive.org link without the 25 second black background at the beginning and the "edition credits" at the end. The archive.org from which the video is sourced also contains two video files which seem to have higher quality than the current quality of the upload:

a 1.3 GB .mkv file which, based from my experiences using archive.org, its the one the website automatically used to directly create the .mp4 file with downscaled quality.
an uncompressed 30 GB .m2ts file, that was directly extracted from the official Blu-ray.

I suggest using the .mkv file to make a higher quality upload than the one we currently have.--Mayimbú (talk) 17:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Negress

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2021 at 15:59:37 (UTC)

Reason: great quality, ev
Articles in which this image appears: A Negress, Anna Bilińska-Bohdanowicz, History of art, Murzyn, Women artists
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Anna Bilińska-Bohdanowicz, uploaded by User:BotMultichillT

Support as nominator. For info: its a new upload to substitute this file of a low quality. – Andrei (talk) 15:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I think some details from ref 3 can be added to the article. Bammesk (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Petar Milošević (talk) 09:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palauenc05 (talk • contribs) 09:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
oppose assuming the height and width dimensions have been reversed its only around 165DPI.©Geni (talk) 15:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not a reason to oppose. FPC counts pixels, not dpi. This is over 3K by 4K pixels, well over requirements. --Janke | Talk 22:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Geni: and yet your screen has around 96 dpi. Than how come to judge higher dpi !? Must be some new "rule". PP are just photographers "by birth". --Petar Milošević (talk) 09:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficient DPI is surely (in principle) a reason to oppose. You might think that it's not a good reason to oppose in this case (no opinion on that), but saying "pixels matter, not DPI" is hardly convincing. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:38, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Anna Bilińska-Bohdanowiczowa - Black girl - MP 5531 - National Museum in Warsaw.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Giuseppe Arcimboldo

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2021 at 17:26:41 (UTC)

Reason: good quality and EV
Articles in which this image appears: Giuseppe Arcimboldo
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Giuseppe Arcimboldo/Google Art Project

Support as nominator – Andrei (talk) 17:26, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 20:36, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Petar Milošević (talk) 09:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:29, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've been a fan of his art since I was a kid! --Janke | Talk 12:28, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:30, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:38, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Giuseppe Arcimboldo - Self Portrait - Google Art Project.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added image to People/Artists and writers instead, as there is no article about the artwork. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Radiated tortoise

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2021 at 14:44:23 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC last week where it was featured unanimously. Critically endangered.
Articles in which this image appears: Radiated tortoise, Astrochelys
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – MER-C 14:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, hope that it will end up on the main page and more people will learn about the turtle. --Andrei (talk) 10:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the green fringing on top of the shell is iridescence and not a camera artefact.©Geni (talk) 16:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nom, and I agree not artefacts. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Radiated tortoise (Astrochelys radiata) Tsimanampetsotsa.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:09, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Ngauruhoe

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2021 at 17:45:53 (UTC)

Original – Panoramic view of Mount Ngauruhoe as seen from Mount Tongariro, with Mount Ruapehu in the background.

Reason: Panorama of Mount Ngauruhoe and surroundings in New Zealand, with Mount Ruapehu in the background. FP on Commons. According to the article, it is designated as an active volcano. Last eruption was in 1977 and minor activity alerts in 2006 and 2015.
Articles in which this image appears: Mount Ngauruhoe
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator: KennyOMG

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 17:45, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wow (talk) 09:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - --Janke | Talk 17:21, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Tongariro02.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2021 at 11:08:38 (UTC)

Reason: File was nominated in 2006 but didn't pass because it was too small at the time. Now, the resolution is high enough to see the cracks. The only FPs of Washington are engravings, so it would be nice to see a painting of him become an FP.
Articles in which this image appears: George Washington
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Gilbert Stuart

Support as nominator – Wow (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't show his wooden teeth, though. – Sca (talk) 14:02, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Struck vote of sock puppet. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - --Janke | Talk 17:21, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Gilbert Stuart Williamstown Portrait of George Washington.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prehnite

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2021 at 19:28:26 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears: Prehnite
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Geology
Creator: Ivar Leidus

Support as nominator – MER-C 19:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ScienceFan66 (talk) 19:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ - Eliko007 (talk) 09:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Struck vote of sock puppet. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wow (talk) 09:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Prehnite - Southbury, Connecticut, USA.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Sleeping Gypsy

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2021 at 21:28:21 (UTC)

Reason: High quality. FP on Commons
Articles in which this image appears: The Sleeping Gypsy, Henri Rousseau
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Henri Rousseau

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Enough detail at 69 pixels per inch. EXIF says ISO 5000 but it's not noisy! Bammesk (talk) 02:26, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Famous painting. Does DPI really matter? I've always thought FPC has a pixel size requirement, not DPI on the original. (Larger is always better, of course, but this is already 3.4K x 5.4K...) --Janke | Talk 09:33, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't matter as long as the scan captures the details of a painting or drawing. For example a line drawn by pencil can easily be 0.5mm wide (0.020 inch) or less, so a resolution of 50 pixels per inch would barely capture such a line or detail. Bammesk (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This is a big canvas, so even more resolution would be good for getting fine detail on the brushwork, but this is good enough for FP for now and we can replace if we ever get a really high-res scan. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ - Eliko007 (talk) 09:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Struck vote of sock puppet. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Gnosis (talk) 03:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:La Bohémienne endormie.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:02, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hohenwerfen Castle

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2021 at 07:57:37 (UTC)

Reason: High quality and high EV, showing nicely the surroundings of the castle
Articles in which this image appears: Hohenwerfen Castle
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Arne Müseler

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 07:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is unfortunate that the castle blends so well into the background that the photo looks rather uninteresting in small size (as it would, on the Main Page). --Janke | Talk 11:40, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Poor composition, too much environmental context. In effect, you can't see the castle for the trees. We don't really need the lower walls & battlements (Flankierungstürme?). Tut mir Leid. – Sca (talk) 14:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ - Eliko007 (talk) 09:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Struck vote of sock puppet. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pontia edusa

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2021 at 08:27:08 (UTC)

Reason: High quality and high EV
Articles in which this image appears: Pontia edusa
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Sven Damerow

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 08:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Eye looks out of focus. If this is a focus stack image, it could probably be improved? I also wonder, is it natural dew, or from a spray bottle... --Janke | Talk 11:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - ScienceFan66 (talk) 19:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Genuine early morning shot, but a few stacking errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ - Eliko007 (talk) 09:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Struck vote of sock puppet. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wow (talk) 09:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 15:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – already FP on Commons. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:11, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Resedafalter am Morgen.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:31, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]