Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/December-2022

• Support – For historical importance. But does The Trooper of Troop K really need its own separate article? With the exception of By Right of Birth, which survives, the articles on the lost films listed in Lincoln Motion Picture Company are all short stubs. Perhaps it would be better if they were rolled into the main article on the company itself, which is also pretty short. They could always be split out again if more information ever turned up (unlikely, given the poor documentation of most films in the silent era, and race films in particular). Choliamb (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on scan quality. Image is blurrier than one would expect for a scanned poster at full resolution (seems to have been upsampled; no quality is lost by viewing the image at 75% size) and a digital restoration feels needed. I'm of the opinion that the article itself is likely fine on its own; contemporary coverage would likely be sufficient to expand the article. I know I relied heavily on contemporary sources when writing about other lost films.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:02, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• I uploaded a restored and sharpened version (Alternate). Pinging the nominator and participants who had quality concerns for a second look. @Jno.skinner, Adam Cuerden, and Crisco 1492:. My vote is Conditional support if the quality concerns are allayed. I also added the image to the production company's article: [13]. Bammesk (talk) 03:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you! I replaced the file used in the article about the movie with your improved version. Jno.skinner (talk) 04:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Nice job on the restoration. Reodorant (talk) 08:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support ALT - That's quite an improvement! Overall the sharpening is done well, but the text beginning "a thrilling picturization" is slightly oversharpened. The area over the Morgan logo also looks like the poster was off the glass when scanning (note the discoloration and slight warp on the text). That being said, the scan is massively improved over what it was, and (as my editing history would suggest) I'm a sucker for film history.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:39, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About oversharpening in "thrilling.....", FWIW there is no spot sharpening. I applied the same sharpening to the entire image in one step or edit. Thanks for the review and happy holidays. Bammesk (talk) 01:52, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:12, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• None of the images has enough support for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:12, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Les Arts Florissants performs Dido & Aeneas

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2022 at 18:16:25 (UTC)

Reason

Very high-quality excerpt of a professional rendition of Henry Purcell's Dido and Aeneas by Les Arts Florissants

Articles in which this image appears

Lea Desandre, Dido and Aeneas, Henry Purcell, William Christie (musician), Les Arts Florissants (ensemble)

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle

Creator

user:czar

• Support as nominator – czar 18:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Copyrighted, see end titles. Does the uploader have permission from all involved? Also self-promotion and ineligible, was uploaded just 3 days ago and added to article(s) yesterday. --Janke | Talk 10:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @

  a preference. It will not be removed from all articles. I fail to see what is self-promotional about this video given its high educational value, rare quality for this open license, and minimal titling. czar 15:04, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Oppose – Per Janke. – Sca (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – I don't see anything wrong with the CC copyright license (check the Youtube release description, the copyright owner is releasing it with a CC license). I very much doubt the video will be removed from its two primary-EV articles, namely [14], [15]. As far as self-promotion, 1- the ensemble isn't uploading and nominating this video, 2- it isn't any different than FP images showing professional athletes playing their sport, or astronauts in spacesuit, but with the added benefit that this video has EV in two articles on art history (not just the articles of the individuals depicted, as is the case with photos of many athletes and astronauts).
  User:CZAR, since this is a recent upload, the file page has a copyright notice saying the copyright has not been reviewed by a Commons admin. In case this nom doesn't pass, I say wait until that notice is resolved and then renominate the video. Support, once the Commons review tag is resolved. Bammesk (talk) 16:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose – I'm not as confident as others that this particular clip will stick in some of the articles into which it has just been inserted. In Dido and Aeneas it duplicates the existing audio file of Kirsten Flagstad's recording of the same aria, which (leaving aside cavils about "authentic" performance style) is a widely admired memento of the historic postwar production at the Mermaid Theater in London, which was arguably the most famous production of this opera in the 20th century. And in Henry Purcell, it's not clear (at least to me) what it is supposed to illustrate. The paragraph on Dido and Aeneas in that article focuses chiefly on the circumstances of the work's composition and its publication history; it mentions neither this aria nor any other specific musical passage. Even more perplexingly, the nominated clip does not appear anywhere near that paragraph; instead it has been inserted into the section at the end of the article devoted to Purcell "in popular culture", a motely collection of contemporary trivia where its presence seems especially gratuitous. Choliamb (talk) 00:48, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  And then it'll still be in several other articles... Even if used primarily in the Lea Desandre and Les Arts Florissants article, it still has high encyclopedic and educational value. Placement within the article is a matter of routine editing. czar 03:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Yann (talk) 19:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Janke and Choliamb. Moreover, no-one has ventured to explain how it meets one of the essential FP criteria, namely "must add significantly [my bold] to at least one article on Wikipedia". I see no evidence of this criterion being met, or even argued. Being a 'very high-quality excerpt of a professional rendition' (which I do not dispute) is not the issue here: in what way does it add significantly to any of the articles into which it has been inserted? Choliamb's comments are particularly relevant in this respect. Smerus (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Smerus, none of the other FPCs make such a rationale, if they give any rationale at all. Is it not abundantly clear that this is a high-quality example of the aria being performed by name-recognized (individually notable) performers? Is it not clear that it serves both to identify both the performers and the ensemble, for each of their articles? Is it not clear that in a copyright environment where performances are rarely released under free licenses, this video demonstrates, in high detail, each of the performers as they play their piece of the composition? To say it's unclear what it adds to these articles strikes me as disingenuous. If we need to pick one article to make the case, pick Lea Desandre. It's a world-class demonstration of her vocal performance. czar 21:36, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps Czar would care to explain what they mean by accusing my comment of disengenuiity. I did not make the rules for FP, nor is our concern in this discussion the qualification of other nominations for FP. Either the nomination meets the rules or it does not. This video, whilst it displays excellent music, does not seem to me to be in any way notable as a picture (which is what FP is about- "the finest images on Wikipedia" as you will see at
  WP:FP); no one in this discussion has indicated anything visually notable about it. If there was a Featured Video or Featured Performance item on WP, it might well qualify - but that is not what is under discussion. The video undoubtedly displays Desandre's abilities, but it does that aurally, not as a picture. Perhpas Czar could give examples of other videos which have been accepted as FPs (I am as it happens not myself aware of any) to assist us with the background of their nomination.--Smerus (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• About "examples of other videos", there are examples in the
  WP:FPC page. Bammesk (talk) 02:44, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wire bonding

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2022 at 15:57:49 (UTC)

Reason

Technically not a flawless photo, but good enough and a good depiction of the article's topic, Wire bonding (a microscopic manufacturing technique). FP on Commons.

Articles in which this image appears

Wire bonding

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Electronics

Creator

Mister rf

• Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 15:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Super quality for a macro (almost micro) shot. Also, I see no ©-mark on the die, so we're good... (Some chips do have a © on them!) --Janke | Talk 17:36, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Wow. A little halo-ing but nothing that isn't overcome by the spectacular detail and color here. -- Veggies (talk) 19:04, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. MER-C 11:31, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 14:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 16:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Choliamb (talk) 22:56, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:07R01.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:28, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conjunction of the Moon and Jupiter

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2022 at 01:39:45 (UTC)

Reason

Dazzling spectacle of the full Moon and Jupiter in a very clean sky, showing the darkness of the Universe. The moon looks amazing and brighter. Good quality picture for a semi-professional camera. Own work

Articles in which this image appears

None

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Understanding

Creator

Viícius94

• Support as nominator – Vinícius O. (talk) 01:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Oppose – That tiny point of light that is Jupiter makes this image of questionable notability, IMO. – Sca (talk) 13:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Low EV per Sca; not used in any article (criterion 5); image of moon lacks details. --Tagooty (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – per Tagooty, not used in any articles. Encyclopedic value? Bammesk (talk) 03:08, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – per above. --Janke | Talk 11:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

House sparrow

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2022 at 11:56:29 (UTC)

Reason

Was seen on Commons FPC two weeks ago, where it was featured unanimously.

Articles in which this image appears

House sparrow

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds

Creator

Rhododendrites

• Support as nominator – MER-C 11:56, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Passer domesticus is one of the most common birds in the world. Notability of this new infobox image? – Sca (talk) 13:13, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Bammesk (talk) 16:15, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is already an FP of the male house sparrow, an image from 13 years ago that is lo-res. This is a case for "delist and replace". --Tagooty (talk) 16:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Much sharper than the old infobox pic. -- Sca (talk) 13:40, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with delisting the old FP. We have been using "delist and replace" to replace FPs with better versions of themselves, examples [21] [22]. We have been using regular noms followed by a delist nom to replace FPs with similar (but different) images. If you want to support, you can do it knowing that the older FP will go through a delist nom shortly after (and if) this nom passes. Bammesk (talk) 03:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support - with the understanding that the earlier FP will be nom for delisting if this nom is promoted. --Tagooty (talk) 13:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Per Tagooty (D&R). – Sca (talk) 13:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 19:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I struck the above vote. You can't vote twice, no exceptions! :-) Bammesk (talk) 02:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:House sparrow male in Prospect Park (53532).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2022 at 12:01:07 (UTC)

Reason

Was seen on Commons FPC two weeks ago, where it was featured unanimously.

Articles in which this image appears

Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture

Creator

Diego Delso

• Support as nominator – MER-C 12:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – czar 15:06, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Bammesk (talk) 16:14, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Choliamb (talk) 22:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Great EV, an improvement in the article's infobox. – Sca (talk) 13:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- High EV and striking image --Tagooty (talk) 15:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 19:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Templo funerario de Hatshepsut, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 13.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:32, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Divje Babe flute

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2022 at 03:17:31 (UTC)

Reason

An interesting artifact, a 50,000+ year old bone found in Slovenia, possibly the remains of a flute, but there is no consensus that it is a flute. It dates to a period when Neanderthals were dominant in Europe, and not modern humans. The artifact is held at the National Museum of Slovenia. FP on Commons.

Articles in which this image appears

Divje Babe flute, +2

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others

Creator

Petar Milošević

• Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 03:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - high EV, high quality image. --Tagooty (talk) 15:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --Petar Milošević (talk) 13:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Slightly insufficient DOF but otherwise OK. MER-C 19:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 19:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Divje Babe flute (Late Pleistocene flute).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:34, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Krishna's Butterball, Mahabalipuram

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2022 at 15:20:26 (UTC)

Reason

An eye-catching image of a precariously-balanced 250-ton boulder. Recently 5-day speedy promoted FP on Commons. It is the infobox image in the Wikipedia article on this boulder. Used in several other Wikipedia articles.

Articles in which this image appears

Infobox - Krishna's Butterball
Others - de:Mamallapuram • fr:Mahabalipuram • ta:கிருஷ்ணரின் வெண்ணெய்ப் பந்து • ta:மாமல்லபுரம்

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Places/Others

Creator

Tagooty

• Support as nominator – Tagooty (talk) 15:24, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – shows the subject of the article well (criterion 3). Its use in non-English articles doesn't count though. Bammesk (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - the photo doesn't show the precarious position of the rock very well, I think this [23] gives a better idea of the (un)balance... --Janke | Talk 09:33, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Janke: The other image composition is cluttered with people, the rock is blurry. Overall, the nom image is more striking and higher quality, more worth featuring, IMO. --Tagooty (talk) 15:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Good quality but doesn't give any clue that this is not just a balanced rock, but half a rock with a clean break on the side away from the camera. ProfDEH (talk) 09:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support
  FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP! 16:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support – Yann (talk) 19:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Krishna Butterball Below Mahabalipuram Sep22 A7C 02490.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:38, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Jackson

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2022 at 23:59:02 (UTC)

Reason

Does have certain issues with blown highlights, but given the age, I think we can forgive that.

Articles in which this image appears

Mary Jackson (engineer) +1

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science_and_engineering

Creator

NASA, restored by Adam Cuerden

• Support as nominator –
  FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP! 23:59, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support – we do have a FP of her, but I wouldn't mind a portrait photo. Bammesk (talk) 01:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 19:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Reodorant (talk) 19:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Sorry, but I have to oppose this one on EV grounds. Given that we have an excellent FP of her already with a much more natural composition in an engineering environment relevant to her profession, I fail to see what a bland portrait of her adds to the comprehensive value of her article. -- Veggies (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  It's been stable as lead for a while.

  FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP! 02:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  I'm not opposed to it on stability grounds. Typically, infoboxes use portraits, rather than dynamic-composition photos, to illustrate the person in a bio article. I just don't feel it adds as much or more to the encyclopedic quality of the article than the FP photo we have of her already. It's a bland photo of a historical figure with much better alternative photos in the public domain. -- Veggies (talk) 22:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Eh, well, it's the third one I've done of her. Variety is good in illustration, and people disliked the wind tunnel one for some reason.

  FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP! 03:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Nothing special, very strained expression, and we have an FP already.Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:37, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Mary Jackson 1979 Portrait (LRC-1979-B701 P-07085).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Prismatic Spring

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2022 at 02:20:39 (UTC)

Reason

Top view of the Grand Prismatic Spring. Technically not flawless, but good enough IMO, and used in many articles. We do have a FP of this site: here, a low resolution side view used in the infobox of the primary article. I think the higher resolution top view deserves a nomination. FP on Commons. If this nom passes, I will nominate the existing aerial FP for delist.

Articles in which this image appears

Grand Prismatic Spring, Carotenoid, Thermophile, Extremophile, Archaea, Geyser, +5

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others

Creator

Carsten Steger

• Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 02:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support - detail lacking somewhat at the pixel level but partially mitigated by this being an aerial shot. MER-C 19:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose - It looks decent, but we already have an FP-quality image of this place, which I feel is rather superior in EV. -- Veggies (talk) 06:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist older one and replace - I wasn't aware of the other aerial FP image. This one here is much better quality. If we can accept the possibility of multiple FPs of the same figure/object, then the older aerial image should be delisted in favor of this one. -- Veggies (talk) 17:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Veggies, about "delist and replace" see my comment in this recent nom. I will nominate the existing aerial FP for delist shortly after (and if) this nom passes. That image isn't used in any articles, so it will certainly be delisted. Bammesk (talk) 01:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• In that case, I wholeheartedly support. Thanks. -- Veggies (talk) 02:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I'm not sure whether, as the creator of the image, I'm allowed to vote. I would like to comment that currently there is an aerial shot that is rated as an FP. While the present image is not technically flawless, IMO it is an improvement compared to the current aerial shot FP because the colors are closer to reality. Also, I believe the EV of the aerial shot is greater than that of the ground-based shot because the aerial shot allows one to see the inner structure of the spring. --Carsten Steger (talk) 17:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Carsten, yes you can vote. Examples: [24] [25]. Bammesk (talk) 04:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – The ground-level view and the aerial view are both very informative, in different ways. There are other subjects with more than one FP, and this image seems deserving to me on its own merits. Choliamb (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 05:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:49, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Aerial image of Grand Prismatic Spring (view from the south).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Winding road to Shingo La

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2022 at 07:55:19 (UTC)

Lahaul, Himachal Pradesh, that connects the region with Zanskar

in Ladakh

Reason

Shows the newly constructed road just below Shingo La, seems to be the best image showing a winding mountain pass road in the Himalayas of India.

Articles in which this image appears

India-China Border Roads

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others

Creator

Timothy Gonsalves

• Support as nominator – UnpetitproleX (talk) 07:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - This image was recently promoted unanimously to FP on Commons. @UnpetitproleX: Thanks for the nomination. --Tagooty (talk) 14:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. MER-C 19:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Bammesk (talk) 03:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- Nythar (💬-❄️) 21:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Darcha Padum Road Below Shinku La Lahaul Oct22 A7C 03533.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:21, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Duchess of Dantzic (redux)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2022 at 15:53:46 (UTC)

Reason

The last nomination was back in October, when a lot of FPs were failing to reach quorum, and got to four supports. Since then, it's passed Commons FPC. Anyway, poster from the original production, so high EV.

Articles in which this image appears

The Duchess of Dantzic

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Theatre

Creator

Percy Anderson, restored by Adam Cuerden

• Support as nominator –
  FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP! 15:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support – per previous nom. Bammesk (talk) 03:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Historically interesting. – Sca (talk) 13:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- Nythar (💬-❄️) 21:12, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. MER-C 19:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Choliamb (talk) 22:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Percy Anderson - Poster for The Duchess of Dantzic.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:24, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrano de Bergerac

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 07:15:51 (UTC)

Reason

One of the newest entries into the National Film Registry. A film that also had the first Hispanic actor, José Ferrer, to win an Oscar.

Articles in which this image appears

Cyrano de Bergerac (1950 film), Cyrano de Bergerac (play)

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment

Creator

Michael Gordon (film director)

• Support as nominator – GamerPro64 07:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Lapsed into PD decades ago, important movie & director, Oscar-winning actor. --Janke | Talk 19:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Yann (talk) 19:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Cyrano de Bergerac (1950).webm --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rambutans with seed

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 12:17:03 (UTC)

Reason

Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously.

Articles in which this image appears

Rambutan

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits

Creator

Ivar Leidus

• Support as nominator – MER-C 12:17, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I'm surprised the photographer was able to get the seed as clean as it is... the flesh really sticks!  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:34, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Artem.G (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Rambutans with seed.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Greater white-fronted goose

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 12:21:14 (UTC)

Reason

Was seen on Commons FPC two weeks ago, where it was featured unanimously.

Articles in which this image appears

Greater white-fronted goose

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds

Creator

Frank Schulenburg

• Support as nominator – MER-C 12:21, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Choliamb (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 09:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• This should be the lead image. I would support in that case. Yann (talk) 09:43, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support but should have been moved to infobox before nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:34, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Artem.G (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Greater white-fronted goose in flight-1045.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Rio de Janeiro: Carioca Landscapes between the Mountain and the Sea", UNESCO World Heritage Site

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 18:12:20 (UTC)

Reason

Good quality picture. Beautiful view to dark hills of Rio de Janeiro on horizon and Guanabara Bay under the afternoon Sun fighting its way through the clouds.

Articles in which this image appears

Niterói

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes

Creator

Vinícius O.

• Support as nominator – Vinícius O. (talk) 18:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Was added to an article image gallery, not to the mainspace just seven days ago. As such, it has zero EV in illustrating the article in question. Further, the technical quality is atrocious. It was taken by a cell phone camera (and not a good one) and it shows. Serious image noise, noticeable tilt, poor white balance, and what I think is uncorrected radial distortion at the edges... and all for an uninspiring composition of some interesting terrain seen from too great a distance. The photo is more sky than anything else. -- Veggies (talk) 05:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Oppose per above. Not exactly atrocious, that's a too strong word, simply just a mediocre, grainy snapshot, little or no EV. Janke | Talk 11:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Green-ish tint, poor composition, EV and exposure. —
  PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 01:51, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]