Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates
![]() | Skip to: |
![]() Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.
If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section. For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here. The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results. If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.
A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section. Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture. For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance. Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.
|
Featured picture tools: |
Step 1:
Evaluate Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations. |
Step 2:
Create a subpage
To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.
To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.
|
Step 3:
Transclude and link Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list ( ). |
How to comment for Candidate Images
How to comment for Delist Images
Editing candidates
Is my monitor adjusted correctly? ![]() In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting. ![]() Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting. ![]() On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background. Note that the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate. Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended. |
- To see recent changes, .
FPCs needing feedback
|
---|
Current nominations
[edit]Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2024 at 17:42:57 (UTC)
- Reason
- High-resolution, visually engaging flyover of a mandelbulb, a 3D fractal. Already featured on Commons and the Persian Wikipedia. The video is slightly brighter at the very top and bottom of the frame and I'm not sure why, but otherwise I see no deficiencies. We do already have a featured picture of a mandelbulb, but I believe this is artistically distinct enough to stand alongside it, as it does on the mandelbulb article.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Mandelbulb
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Mathematics
- Creator
- PantheraLeo1359531
- Support as nominator – Moonreach (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support What an honor, thank you :) --PantheraLeo1359531 (talk) 17:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2024 at 15:29:11 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Selection_on_the_ramp_at_Auschwitz-Birkenau%2C_1944_%28Auschwitz_Album%29_1b.jpg/389px-Selection_on_the_ramp_at_Auschwitz-Birkenau%2C_1944_%28Auschwitz_Album%29_1b.jpg)
- Reason
- high EV historical image used in many articles
- Articles in which this image appears
- Auschwitz Album, The Holocaust in Poland, etc.
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
- Creator
- Unknown photographer from the Auschwitz Erkennungsdienst. Several sources believe the photographer to have been SS officers Ernst Hoffmann or Bernhard Walter, restored by Yann
- Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 15:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 17:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2024 at 15:22:08 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/74/NASA%E2%80%99s_Boeing_Crew_Flight_Test_Launch_%28NHQ202406050029%29.jpg/260px-NASA%E2%80%99s_Boeing_Crew_Flight_Test_Launch_%28NHQ202406050029%29.jpg)
- Reason
- Quality lead image in Boeing Crew Flight Test. The first crewed launch of the Boeing Starliner in June 2024.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Boeing Crew Flight Test, Boeing Starliner, United Launch Alliance
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
- Creator
- NASA/Joel Kowsky
- Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 17:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2024 at 10:26:33 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Ammomane_%C3%A9l%C3%A9gante_Jbil.jpg/391px-Ammomane_%C3%A9l%C3%A9gante_Jbil.jpg)
- Reason
- Featured on Commons. Headline image.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Bar-tailed lark
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- El Golli Mohamed
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ZZZ'S 16:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment — Not visually grabbing, but I suppose that's the curse of trying to photograph a small animal that's evolved to blend in with its environment. The composition is excellent, though; overall, I'm neutral. Moonreach (talk) 17:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2024 at 10:02:23 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Aerial_image_of_Finsteraarhorn_%28view_from_the_south%29.jpg/347px-Aerial_image_of_Finsteraarhorn_%28view_from_the_south%29.jpg)
- Reason
- Unanimously featured on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Finsteraarhorn etc.
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
- Creator
- Carsten Steger
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Seems slightly oversharpened, but not to the point of haloing, so I'm good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – agree that it's oversharpened. Bammesk (talk) 14:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – per above ZZZ'S 16:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2024 at 02:07:11 (UTC)
- Reason
- I nominated this before years ago and it almost was promoted so I'm nominating it again.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Don't Be a Sucker, American propaganda during World War II, Unite the Right rally
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
- Creator
- United States Department of War
- Support as nominator – GamerPro64 02:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Just as relevant today, as it was then. --Janke | Talk 07:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ―Howard • 🌽33 12:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 14:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 17:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2024 at 14:22:37 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Plac_Wilsona_Warsaw_2022_aerial.jpg/347px-Plac_Wilsona_Warsaw_2022_aerial.jpg)
- Reason
- Good quality and EV
- Articles in which this image appears
- Wilson Square, Żoliborz
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
- Creator
- User:Emptywords
- – EUPBR (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 16:51, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - I note the distortion caused by the wide-angle lens, but overall this is excellent for showing the scale and layout of the square. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support This is rather lacking in wow factor (a photo taken while a tram was passing through would have added a bit more interest and EV, for example), but has good EV and is well executed. Nick-D (talk) 08:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – The sharpness on the right corners is subpar. It's an interesting intersection. The first time I see a roundabout with rail tracks going through it! Bammesk (talk) 14:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 15:07:29 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8f/Tissot_The_Flight_of_the_Prisoners.jpg/381px-Tissot_The_Flight_of_the_Prisoners.jpg)
- Reason
- High-resolution of a painting depicting a major event in religious history. A Google search for this painting turns up results with color grading that's all over the place; this copy is from The Jewish Museum's website, and Google says they hold the original.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Babylonian captivity, Kingdom of Judah, Books of Kings, others
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
- Creator
- Painted by Jacques Joseph Tissot, this version uploaded to Commons by Opencooper
- Support as nominator – Moonreach (talk) 15:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - resolution is a bit smaller than many of our painting FPs, but given that this work is smaller (less than a foot on the long side), it's fine for me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – but the two source links on the image page are dead. These [1] [2] archive links should be added next to the dead source links, FP criterion #6. Bammesk (talk) 14:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 13:04:22 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Olivia_de_Havilland%2C_actress%2C_1985.jpg/260px-Olivia_de_Havilland%2C_actress%2C_1985.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Olivia_de_Havilland%2C_actress%2C_1985_-_levels_adjustment.jpg/260px-Olivia_de_Havilland%2C_actress%2C_1985_-_levels_adjustment.jpg)
- Reason
- High technical quality; captures the actress in the twilight years of her career; featured on Commons
- Articles in which this image appears
- Olivia de Havilland
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
- Creator
- Bernard Gotfryd
Supportas nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)- Support either — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Levels are way off. Even the simplest "Put the brightest red point to 255, darkest to 0, and so on with green and blue, and then do a midpoint and blackpoint can vastly improve it. It's like a film over it gets removed. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 00:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 09:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support: ALT.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support either, favor alt. Technical precision aside, the original was already quite good; I had to fullscreen them to see the difference. Moonreach (talk) 15:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think that the original is not bad, but the edited version is much brighter and clearer. It has a better quality altogether. Luna Cielus (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support either – Bammesk (talk) 01:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt. MER-C 09:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 12:37:47 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/De_Havilland_DH.98_Mosquito_B_Mk_IV_Series_2_%28restoration%29.jpg/385px-De_Havilland_DH.98_Mosquito_B_Mk_IV_Series_2_%28restoration%29.jpg)
- Reason
- Excellent image of a remarkable aircraft; fantastic quality for 1942/1943
- Articles in which this image appears
- de Havilland Mosquito
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Air
- Creator
- Fotoafdrukken Koninklijke Luchtmacht; restored by — Chris Woodrich (talk)
- Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 13:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support A few bright specks upper left, but nothing above filmgrain size. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 21:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'll have a looksie in a bit. Doing a bit of writing - finally got some inspiration — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Alright, I think I got them. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good. It's an in-air photo from the 40s, so that forgives a lot of filmgrain. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 00:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Alright, I think I got them. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Deserving lead image for its article, and being in action in wartime makes up for any minor film imperfections. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 16:30, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. As an aside, @Chris Woodrich, do we know what location the plane is flying over in this photo? — Matarisvan (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, that's not provided by the source. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- This image doesn't look very realistic. It appears to be a highly stylized or edited representation rather than a true-to-life photograph of the De Havilland Mosquito. Luna Cielus (talk) 21:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support High quality photo of this important aircraft type. The fact that it depicts an aircraft serving with a front line combat unit adds strongly to the EV. Nick-D (talk) 23:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 10:42:27 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Zhuhai_Fisher_Girl_statue_dllu.jpg/463px-Zhuhai_Fisher_Girl_statue_dllu.jpg)
- Reason
- Unanimously featured on Commons. Headline image.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Zhuhai, Zhuhai Fisher Girl, Pan He
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
- Creator
- Dllu
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Excellent technical quality, though an article on the statue would cement its EV better than we have now. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- I do see that there is enough for a stub in the Zhuhai article already. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Working on Zhuhai Fisher Girl now – once I got the Mandarin title, wasn't too hard to get some sources. I note that Pan He is identified as the sculptor. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – very nice photo and the article has a section on the statue. Bammesk (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support now that we have Zhuhai Fisher Girl — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 10:28:13 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Black-throated_green_warbler_in_PP_%2814050%29.jpg/360px-Black-throated_green_warbler_in_PP_%2814050%29.jpg)
- Reason
- Unanimously featured on Commons in June. Headline image.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Black-throated green warbler, Setophaga
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- Rhododendrites
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:28, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ZZZ'S 22:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 19:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportLuna Cielus (talk) 20:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Support.The image has very good quality and it captures a clear view on the Black-throated green warbler species. Luna Cielus (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)- I struck the above votes. Editor has less than 100 edits. See instruction on top of the WP:FPC page. Bammesk (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Nominations — to be closed
[edit]Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.
Older nominations requiring additional input from users
[edit]These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.
Closing procedure
[edit]A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC
When NOT promoted, perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
- If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing
{{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}}
on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
When promoted, perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
- Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
- Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
- Add the image to:
- Template:Announcements/New featured content - newest on top, remove the oldest so that 15 are listed at all times.
- Wikipedia:Goings-on - newest on bottom.
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs - newest on top.
- Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
- The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
- Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
- Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
- If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
- Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
- If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}}
to the top of the section. - Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the September archive. This is done by simply adding the line
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}}
from this page to the bottom of the archive. - If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.
Delist closing procedure
[edit]Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.
If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:
- Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
- Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.
If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
- Replace the
{{Featured picture}}
tag from the image with{{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}
. - Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.
If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
- Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
- Replace the
{{Featured picture}}
tag from the delisted image with{{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}
. - Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
- Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
- Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}}
to the top of the section. - Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}}
to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive. - If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.
Recently closed nominations
[edit]Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2024 at 12:04:24 (UTC)
- Reason
- A Featured Media on Commons
- Articles in which this image appears
- His Girl Friday
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
- Creator
- Howard Hawks
- Support as nominator – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 12:04, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt 1 --Carlosmarkos2345 | Talk 12:33, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I was the uploader on this one. It's worth noting that this video is impacted by phabricator:T362831 (MediaWiki not transcoding HDR properly), so you'll notice the UHD source has HDR but the HD transcodes that MediaWiki produces are in SDR without a proper tonemapping. For cases like this, I'm not sure if it would be better to add a notice to the file page advising readers of the difference or do a UHD upload in SDR. It's a good transfer with encyclopedic value, so if that question can be settled, I'd support. hinnk (talk) 21:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have an alt I'd like to add, but unfortunately I've been trying to upload it since Saturday and gotten nothing but upload errors (seems to be because of phab:T129621). I'd like to ask for the nomination to be suspended until I can get the alt uploaded, so we avoid having to go through a delist-and-replace nomination after this closes. If anyone here's an admin on Commons and can speedy delete c:File:His Girl Friday (1940, SDR).webm, that might help things along. hinnk (talk) 02:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just got a fix uploaded to File:His Girl Friday (1940, SDR).webm. It's identical to the original nomination except for the color space, so the playback should have more sensible contrast levels. Support that as alt 1. hinnk (talk) 02:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have an alt I'd like to add, but unfortunately I've been trying to upload it since Saturday and gotten nothing but upload errors (seems to be because of phab:T129621). I'd like to ask for the nomination to be suspended until I can get the alt uploaded, so we avoid having to go through a delist-and-replace nomination after this closes. If anyone here's an admin on Commons and can speedy delete c:File:His Girl Friday (1940, SDR).webm, that might help things along. hinnk (talk) 02:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 17:56, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Yann (talk) 19:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 04:15, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 02:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Carlosmarkos2345, Moonreach, Yann, Vinícius94, and Hamid Hassani: An alternative was added to the nomination. Could you indicate which version(s) you support? Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 07:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really understand the benefit of the new version, specially the advantage of SDR for old films and black and white videos. To me, it seems to have more contrast. Is it really the case, or a side-effect? Which version is more faithful to the original film? Yann (talk) 14:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I second this uncertainty. While I can see that the alt has slightly higher contrast, the difference between the two is so slight that I don't feel qualified to say what standards should be used to decide which is superior. Moonreach (talk) 18:06, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with Yann that it'd be better to show it in HDR than to not. That said, what's happening is most people will never see an HDR video on Wikipedia because they'll use the default playback, which is always in SDR.
- The "Source" playback on the original file can be used as a reference. That's in HDR, and if you have a display that properly handles HDR, there'll be a big difference between that and the default "HD 1080p" SDR playback (on that or on a color video, for example). With the transcodes on the original, there's no tonemapping at all, so it looks least like the film. With alt 1, the source file had the tonemapping applied when I converted it from HDR, so the transcodes will look more like the film. hinnk (talk) 18:33, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll support the alt too, if that's what it takes to get this over the finish line. Moonreach (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- I second this uncertainty. While I can see that the alt has slightly higher contrast, the difference between the two is so slight that I don't feel qualified to say what standards should be used to decide which is superior. Moonreach (talk) 18:06, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really understand the benefit of the new version, specially the advantage of SDR for old films and black and white videos. To me, it seems to have more contrast. Is it really the case, or a side-effect? Which version is more faithful to the original film? Yann (talk) 14:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- The vote count is 5 supports for the Original and 3 supports for the Alt 1. There is consensus to promote the Original. In the article, I reverted back to the Original video. Pinging @Armbrust and Hinnk:. Bammesk (talk) 13:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Voting stopped <24 hours after alt 1 was uploaded, and neither Vinícius O. nor Hamid Hassani have edited since alt 1 was uploaded. I would suggest (1) opening the discussion to opinions from people who haven't participated, (2) closing as consensus to promote the original and starting a procedural nomination to replace, or (3) leaving the nomination open until Vinícius O. and Hamid Hassani have a chance to weigh in. Otherwise we're stuck presenting (and featuring!) an encoding error for procedural reasons around when the file was uploaded, which I think should be avoided. hinnk (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- If the current consensus doesn't change and the Original is promoted, then you or anyone can start a "Delist and Replace" nomination to get consensus for Alt 1. Bammesk (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was hoping to avoid having to make everyone go through a separate nomination but it looks like that might end up being the best route. hinnk (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah. If we close this one then we can give it another go-around with just the alt and I think it'll pass. I don't know how long these things are normally left open, but we're coming up on a month since this nomination was made. Moonreach (talk) 15:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was hoping to avoid having to make everyone go through a separate nomination but it looks like that might end up being the best route. hinnk (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- If the current consensus doesn't change and the Original is promoted, then you or anyone can start a "Delist and Replace" nomination to get consensus for Alt 1. Bammesk (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:His Girl Friday (1940).webm --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2024 at 12:52:12 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Jaws_movie_poster.png/250px-Jaws_movie_poster.png)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/Jaws_movie_poster.jpg/250px-Jaws_movie_poster.jpg)
- Reason
- High-resolution upload of the iconic film poster for one of the most popular American films, which was the highest-grossing film of all time upon its release.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Jaws (film), Roger Kastel
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
- Creator
- Roger Kastel
- Support as nominator – –Dream out loud (talk) 12:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt 1 – Iconic image. Yann (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. It's a classic and iconic poster from one of the most famous American films. The file is indeed in the public domain, which was affirmed by the US Copyright Office, so no IP issues should be present. Di (they-them) (talk) 01:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment – Lacks current EV. Meh. – Sca (talk) 12:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt 1 It's not the best reproduction, but it's good enough for now. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 15:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Two questions:
- 1) Given Mediawiki's difficulty rendering PNG, is that the best format for this file? EDIT: I note that the source is jpg.
- 2) The cited reference for public domain status is a dead link. Meanwhile, this copy has a clear copyright notice. How sure are we that this is free? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Here is an archived copy. This assessment from the Copyright Office seems to specifically be about the illustration of the shark and swimmer, rather than this poster as a document in and of itself; the report says that the illustration was originally published as the cover of the novel's paperback edition. One could argue that, if the Copyright Office holds the illustration to be public domain, the rest of the poster is, too, since it's just text and simple shapes that wouldn't be copyrightable on their own. That steers closer to original research than I think I'm comfortable with, though. Moonreach (talk) 20:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I finally got this one to work. That is... a heck of a read, and I'm curious if Commons/Wikimedia council have explored the implications of this decision (sounds like a lot of book covers may actually be PD). My concern about copyright is quelled - aside from the brief tagline, none of the text really seems to cross the threshold of originality for the United States, and the illustration is free. Still have a question about the format; since the original was a JPG, being PNG only prevents loss during re-use. A JPG would render better on Wikipedia. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I guess I linked the original instead of the archived copy I was reading. Sorry you had to go digging. Moonreach (talk) 22:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- No worries! It was a good read, and worth digging. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I guess I linked the original instead of the archived copy I was reading. Sorry you had to go digging. Moonreach (talk) 22:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- I finally got this one to work. That is... a heck of a read, and I'm curious if Commons/Wikimedia council have explored the implications of this decision (sounds like a lot of book covers may actually be PD). My concern about copyright is quelled - aside from the brief tagline, none of the text really seems to cross the threshold of originality for the United States, and the illustration is free. Still have a question about the format; since the original was a JPG, being PNG only prevents loss during re-use. A JPG would render better on Wikipedia. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Here is an archived copy. This assessment from the Copyright Office seems to specifically be about the illustration of the shark and swimmer, rather than this poster as a document in and of itself; the report says that the illustration was originally published as the cover of the novel's paperback edition. One could argue that, if the Copyright Office holds the illustration to be public domain, the rest of the poster is, too, since it's just text and simple shapes that wouldn't be copyrightable on their own. That steers closer to original research than I think I'm comfortable with, though. Moonreach (talk) 20:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt1 – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 16:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've decided to BOLD-ly add ALT1 as a JPG. Support ALT1 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt1 – Bammesk (talk) 15:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support either. MER-C 10:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Chris, the Alt1 version has more jpeg artifacts, see the red "JAWS" text area. Easy to see at an enlargment of 150%. Can you reconvert using a larger file size and/or zero compression? Bammesk (talk) 13:14, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is the version directly from the source. I can see if Photoshop can clear it a bit. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I missed that part. Much better now, thanks. Bammesk (talk) 13:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Alright, I added new layers with the three primary colours (red, black, white) and set them at 75% opacity. That has taken care of the artifacting in the wordmark (in both instances). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Shouldn't we ping Dream out loud, Yann, Di, Carlosmarkos2345, and possibly Sca and VulcanSphere to see if they prefer/also support the alt? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 21:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. The instructions on top of the WP:FPC page say: "Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and 'update their votes' accordingly." Bammesk (talk) 21:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'll update my vote, Support for either. Di (they-them) (talk) 23:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Vulcan has affirmed his support towards ALT1. Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- I support ALT1. –Dream out loud (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Jaws movie poster.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2024 at 15:28:51 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Wikipe-tan_and_Adult_Commons-tan_Yuri.png/250px-Wikipe-tan_and_Adult_Commons-tan_Yuri.png)
- Reason
- A rather masterful illustration of a "fictional relationship that causes controversy", a concept somewhat difficult to illustrate through CC! My friend drew this image on my suggestion for the Shipping discourse article.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Shipping discourse
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle
- Creator
- Honemura (Commons user)
- Support as nominator – Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:28, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I'm torn. On the oppose end, Wikipe-tan and Commons-tan are not prominent figures in the shipping community, and being abstract idealizations of these projects, they don't have set ages that illustrate the age gap in a meaningful fashion. On the support end, we're not going to get free images of the copyrighted characters that dominate the shipping community, and frankly I love the Renoir vibes. This is a useful image... I'm just not sure that it meets the FP threshold. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment – Perhaps it is a personal failure with recognizing emotion in art, but I could not discern that this was meant to be a romantic context without the caption. Even so, I'm not going to vote yes or no on this one. ―Howard • 🌽33 17:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- If anything, this image deserves a "most contested FP nomination" of the year. ―Howard • 🌽33 20:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- User-generated art tends to get controversial. The lead image at yaoi was similar, over a decade back (and the Commons nom was also contentious) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:55, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - it was added to the article today... --Janke | Talk 18:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – Beyond the ken of most Eng.-lang. readers. – Sca (talk) 12:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support - It's a beautiful art piece IMO and the image is educationally useful. I'm not sure that I agree with the argument about it being "beyond the ken" of readers, since Wikipedia exists to help people learn and understand subjects they may have had no prior understanding of. FP has also featured technical and scientific charts and diagrams, which I imagine are at least a little difficult for average readers to understand without further reading. Di (they-them) (talk) 01:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support I believe it's somewhat using Japanese artistic tropes to dshow the relationship, which suits the characters. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 16:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This doesn't seem to illustrate the concept well given that it appears to be a fan fiction thing, and I don't think that anyone is writing fan fiction about thse obscure representations of Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. Nick-D (talk) 05:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Nick-D: Would it help if I did?
- Wikipe-tan looked up at Commons-tan, blushing slightly as they sat on the bench. They had worked together in their efforts to protect knowledge for so long, but Wikipe-tan was more of an author, and Commons-tan more of an artist, and their endeavours seemed so different. They were separate in their endeavours, and yet.... they collaborated constantly. As she looked up at Commons-tan, it felt like there was... more there between them. Commons-tan reached over, unsaid words hung in the air, and Wikipe-tan leaned closer, looking down to the hand in her lap, which held a gift... the perfect image for one of her 6.8 million articles from Commons-tan's 108 mllion files. She would treasure it forever, (or at least until the next edit war waged within her, and replaced it with one that had randomly been turned black and white, but that's a conflict for a later chapter). Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 21:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Huh? ―Howard • 🌽33 22:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- And now someone has written romantic fanfiction about them. Proving Nick-D a horrible liar who should be ashamed of himself. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 22:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Do note where that linked text goes. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 00:11, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- I sure will ;) Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Dangit, that made me laugh. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 11:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- I sure will ;) Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- It seems the image of a fictional relationship that causes controversy has itself caused controversy. ―Howard • 🌽33 20:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Do note where that linked text goes. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 00:11, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- And now someone has written romantic fanfiction about them. Proving Nick-D a horrible liar who should be ashamed of himself. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 22:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Huh? ―Howard • 🌽33 22:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - I agree with NickD. This is not a real-world example. MER-C 18:44, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. It's beautiful art and it fits the article well; I find the opposes somewhat unreasonable, given that the point of the image is to help you understand the subject of the article, and the idea of fanfiction is that it is both art and can sometimes include art—I would consider the work to be that. If the art can be considered a work of fanfiction, I think it fits, and the notion that a character needs to be popular to have works based on it is rather unreasonable, and the notion that the example needs to be "real-world" is even more unreasonable given that it's quite literally an article about fictitious relationships. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 19:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per my arguments above. EV is minimal when the characters are not commonly shipped (or even commonly the subject of fan fiction), as it does not represent the general landscape of the subject (not that a landscape where Barry Benson has multiple fan fictions, and "Garfield Effect" exists, can be easily summarized in one image) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too in-universe to be easily understood or representative. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Nick and Chris. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- I was confused by this one, and decided to go through the criteria list to do things by the book.
- "1. Is of a high technical standard." In terms of portraiture, this shows well-developed skill, but it's very low contrast in places. I downloaded a copy and grayscaled it; it doesn't read well at all that way. Ambiguous.
- "2. Is of high resolution." Yes.
- "3. Is among Wikipedia's best work." That's broad, but "It illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more" is better. I guess this might. The most I can say is that it doesn't look like the other images I've seen cycle through Today's Featured Picture.
- "4. Has a free license." Yes.
- "5. Adds significant encyclopedic value to an article." I'm doubtful of this; if anything, I think you need to read the article to understand what the picture is showing.
- "6. Is verifiable." No; using Wikipedia's own mascots to illustrate this concept is, if not original research, then at least an aspect that makes the work harder to understand than it otherwise would be. Wikipedia is kind of in a bind on this; an image showing two copyrighted characters the public is familiar with would showcase the concept better but wouldn't be free use.
- "7. Has a descriptive, informative and complete file description in English." While the current description could be more detailed, I think it's sufficient.
- "8. Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation." The image is natively digital; I don't think this applies.
- By my count, this picture passes on points 2, 4 and 7; is marginal on points 1 and 3; fails points 5 and 6; and point 8 doesn't apply. I have to say oppose; this is a well-made image, but the concept it's trying to illustrate is complex and innately tied to the world of copyright in ways that are hard to work around. I don't think it's FP quality. Moonreach (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: – ―Howard • 🌽33 20:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Oppose. The drawing itself are very well done in my opinion however i don't think it suits well with the Wikipedia article (it does help me imagining it but doesn't made it easier to understand). What about Picture of the day on Wikimedia Commons? Stvk Công Cuối (VN) (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- I struck this vote. Editor has less than 100 edits. See instructions on top of the WP:FPC page. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 16:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2024 at 22:15:03 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Eastern_amberwing_%2875121%29.jpg/330px-Eastern_amberwing_%2875121%29.jpg)
- Reason
- Excellent dragonfly image! High EV, good quality.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Eastern amberwing
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
- Creator
- Rhododendrites
- Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 16:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 10:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ZZZ'S 22:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Eastern amberwing (75121).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2024 at 19:54:14 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/Lauren_Bacall_by_Bernard_Gotfryd.jpg/260px-Lauren_Bacall_by_Bernard_Gotfryd.jpg)
- Reason
- The best picture from this period of her life, and includes the manuscript of her autobiography, which is helpful. Composition is way better than the other image presumably from that same session. Downside: Not the lead image, and the article has many of her, but I think the manuscript helps a lot with EV, as it gives it something unique compared to the other photos.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Lauren Bacall +1
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Bernard Gotfryd, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 19:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Was honestly going to nominate this, until I saw that you were still actively working on it. It's an excellent image, showing her at work on something that was important to her during the period. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Yann (talk) 17:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom and per Chris. Nick-D (talk) 07:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 10:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Lauren Bacall by Bernard Gotfryd.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2024 at 11:07:57 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/74/La_Promenade%2C_by_Pierre-Auguste_Renoir.jpg/260px-La_Promenade%2C_by_Pierre-Auguste_Renoir.jpg)
- Reason
- Good reproduction of a painting with a specific article.
- Articles in which this image appears
- La Promenade (Renoir) etc.
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
- Creator
- Pierre-Auguste Renoir
- Support as nominator – MER-C 11:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Yann (talk) 18:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 15:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:La Promenade, by Pierre-Auguste Renoir.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2024 at 10:32:02 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Rufa_red_knot_%28Calidris_canutus_rufa%29_in_Delaware_Bay%2C_New_Jersey.jpg/390px-Rufa_red_knot_%28Calidris_canutus_rufa%29_in_Delaware_Bay%2C_New_Jersey.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Kn%C3%BCpfen_des_Von_Leffern_knoten_3.jpg/164px-Kn%C3%BCpfen_des_Von_Leffern_knoten_3.jpg)
- Reason
- Unanimously featured on Commons. Headline image. The image has undergone noise reduction since the previous nomination.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Red knot etc.
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- Needsmoreritalin
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 11:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support (though it does feel slightly oversharpened). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ―Howard • 🌽33 17:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – I was planning on nominating this image. Thanks! ZZZ'S 23:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for the nomination. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:15, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Rufa red knot (Calidris canutus rufa) in Delaware Bay, New Jersey.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2024 at 20:07:27 (UTC)
- Reason
- It is true that the original video quality is only 240p, however I think its historical value as the first video ever uploaded to YouTube vindicates it. As far as I am aware, restoration or remastering is unnecessary since this is how the video was originally uploaded. The video was also selected as media of the day on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Me at the zoo, Jawed Karim
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
- Creator
- Jawed Karim
- Support as nominator – ―Howard • 🌽33 20:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support - I've pulled the link to the archived version and confirmed that the video was under a CC-BY license on the attributed date. This is a historical artifact, with a good article on it, and a very important piece of the internet timeline. We've previously featured File:Trojan Room coffee pot xcoffee.png, which was in its native resolution, so there is precedent for resolutions lower than "minimum" for works such as this. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Pivotal moment for the internet. GamerPro64 04:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – Purported significance not apparent. Odd content, lacks EV. – Sca (talk) 12:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support I disagree. --ZZZ'S 13:05, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Me at the zoo.webm --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2024 at 15:18:59 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/NASA_astronaut_Leland_D._Melvin_with_his_dogs_Jake_and_Scout.jpg/325px-NASA_astronaut_Leland_D._Melvin_with_his_dogs_Jake_and_Scout.jpg)
- Reason
- Excellent portrait that was previously nominated in 2020. I've added a bit of a blurb on the viral image, and found a higher resolution presentation that was Tweeted by NASA, so all of the criticisms from the first nomination should be dealt with.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Leland D. Melvin; Dog behavior
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
- Creator
- Robert Markowitz for NASA
- Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support per my comment from the previous nomination - this is a great photo that illustrates several aspects of the subject's life and is also useful for articles on the relationships between humans and dogs. Nick-D (talk) 01:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 03:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ZZZ'S 04:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – good photo! ―Howard • 🌽33 20:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – A warm and touching picture. —Bruce1eetalk 23:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Yann (talk) 18:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:NASA astronaut Leland D. Melvin with his dogs Jake and Scout.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Suspended nominations
[edit]This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.