Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/June-2018

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.

Closeup head shot of large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2018 at 16:40:45 (UTC)

Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim

Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla

, Sikkim - Front Telephoto Shot

Reason

Support as nominator – Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 16:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Sharp image but very awkward angle. Is it possible to shoot from straight ahead from a location further away (telephoto)? --Janke | Talk 19:36, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as above. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New versions not FP quality. You need a nicer day! Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:41, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I actually like Alt. 2 - the overcast lighting prevents blown highlights and sooty shadows. The sky could be better, admittedly. Some careful levels/curve editing could improve this one quite a bit, though - as is, it's too dark IMO. --Janke | Talk 11:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I have made levels/curve editing and some other minor adjustments as advised above. The edited photograph has been uploaded as a new version on the same image (Alternate Image 2). Pl share your views on this latest version. -Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 12:31, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely better now. Suggest you ask for this nom to be closed, and nominate the edited Alt 2 as a new nom. --Janke | Talk 13:50, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Janke. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose would be nice to have the whole statue in frame, not just a part from strange angle. Mattximus (talk) 03:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am submitting two alternate images of the same statue taken from a different position. Alternate Image 1 is in wide angle covering the entire statue and portion of the compound in which the same is situated. Alternate Image 2 is taken in telephoto from the front covering the entire statue in line with what is advised by Janke. Pl share your views on the alternate Images whichever one is more appropriate. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 07:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sarawak state assembly building

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2018 at 03:04:34 (UTC)

Reason: The image is clear at depicting the state assembly building which has a unique architecture and its landscape . It is also an icon of the state of Sarawak.
Articles in which this image appears: Sarawak, New Sarawak State Legislative Assembly Building, Sarawak State Legislative Assembly
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: CEphoto, Uwe Aranas

Support as nominator – Cerevisae (talk) 03:04, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Tentative~~ support - why is this image not in New Sarawak State Legislative Assembly Building - it's much higher quality than the existing lead image. If it's added there, I would support. Chris857 (talk) 04:05, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Full support now. Chris857 (talk) 23:29, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it could be FP if it illustrates that article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Added this image to other articles. Cerevisae (talk) 09:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good now. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 00:32, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:39, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mattximus (talk) 23:32, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 21:09, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 08:49, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:37, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Kuching Sarawak Dewan-Undangan-Negeri-Sarawak-01.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bosc's fringe-toed lizards

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2018 at 07:36:37 (UTC)

Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) love bite as part of courtship ritual; Dana Biosphere Reserve, Jordan

Reason: Valuable illustration of behaviour in a high quality image. FP on Commons
Articles in which this image appears

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:36, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 00:32, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – good EV. Chris857 (talk) 16:25, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Bosc's fringe-toed lizards (Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) love bite.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine sunbird

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2018 at 07:45:15 (UTC)

Cinnyris osea osea) in the Dana Biosphere Reserve, Jordan

Reason: High quality image of a bird that barely stops while feeding. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, nice species. Brandmeister^talk 17:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ colorful, its detailed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.185.152.34 (talk) 13:43, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment While IP's can comment on nominations, they can't cast !votes. So I struck it. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:31, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Would likely support either way, but do you know what plant that is? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

St. Joan of Arc Chapel

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2018 at 21:12:40 (UTC)

Reason: high quality image as lead image
Articles in which this image appears: St. Joan of Arc Chapel
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Leroy Skalstad

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – nice and sharp. I don't know why the sky has a fine grain though!? Bammesk (talk) 02:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes the sky is weird. I had a similar problem (all over the image) when converting RAW using Photoshop CS6 rather than the latest Canon Digital Photo Professional software. 17:25, 31 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs)
Comment I see the same grain all over. It's simply more noticeable in the sky. --Janke | Talk 05:35, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support However if you want here [1] i have upload a version with lose noise and vignetting if you want --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 09:02, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Frankly a bit crowded, but given the layout of this chapel I don't see any way of avoiding it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:24, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I uploaded a slightly denoised version and removed the fine grain. If anyone disagrees, just revert. Bammesk (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Needs one more, so here we go! ;-) --Janke | Talk 11:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The graining is much improved, but I don't see this as an FP composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Joan of Arc chapel-2290483.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Billie Holiday by William P. Gottlieb

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2018 at 17:30:48 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution photograph of iconic singer by a famous photographer, fully restored
Articles in which this image appears: Song, Feminism, Billie Holiday, Women in music, 20th-century music, Billy Paul, Billie Holiday discography, Maryland Women's Hall of Fame, Something About the Night
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: William P. Gottlieb

Support as nominator – Kaldari (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 11:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is only one of many images in the Wikipedia article and isn't the main one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I just switched it with the existing infobox image on the Billie Holiday article. It's also been the lead image at song and women in music since 2015, and the lead image at Billie Holiday discography since 2011. Although it's true we have several pictures of Billy Holiday, this is definitely the best one. Kaldari (talk) 02:36, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 14:04, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice image. I do wish that it had a little bit tighter of a crop on top or more space to the right... go reshoot it, will you? :) Regardless, it's a great pic. Thanks for restoring. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Missvain (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Billie Holiday, Downbeat, New York, N.Y., ca. Feb. 1947 (William P. Gottlieb 04251).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2018 at 14:44:07 (UTC)

[2] Original – Large

Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla

, Sikkim

Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla

, Sikkim

Reason

Support as nominator – Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:44, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 17:00, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Subhrajyoti07, i have upload [3]a version with the colours correct if you need,bye--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 09:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you LivioAndronico for your effort in improving the photo. I have taken the pointers here and added some additional changes and created the Edit 1 version. Pl share your views on the same. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 16:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support now, since brightness is fixed. The sky is still a bit ominous, though... --Janke | Talk 17:11, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Saturation may be a tad high for an overcast day, but I think this is still a good representation of this statue. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:23, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ~~Colours do not seem natural.~~ Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

colours have been much improved, but the weather and technical quality, possibly limited by the camera's capabilities, are not FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:13, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – agree with Chris and Charles. I would change my vote to Support if saturation, and perhaps even contrast, are reduced. (the clothing of visitors at the base of the statue are too colorful, not real) Bammesk (talk) 02:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose – ~~Per previous two. Colors look over-manipulated to me.~~ Saturation has been toned down but to me it still seems rather too pronounced. ~~Sca (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)~~ – Sca (talk) 13:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Thanks for the feedback received till now. I have created a slightly different version of the original uploaded picture as Edit 1. In this version the saturation and the global contrast has been dialed down a bit in line with the feedback. Also the sky looks more natural. The new version has been uploaded along with a link to the original image (at the top). Pl share your views - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – better now, I struck my oppose. At full size the bright boundary around earlobes is distracting, especially on left side, can it be improved? Bammesk (talk) 01:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Thanks for identifying. I have made some changes on the edges of both the ear lobes and some body part edges to rectify the issue. Pl check and let me know if the same has been resolved. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Bammesk (talk) 03:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting other reviewers of preceding FPCs to share your views as well: @Crisco 1492, Marvellous Spider-Man, Tomer T, Rhododendrites, Yann, Mattximus, Chris857, Brandmeister, Gnosis, and Nick-D: - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:35, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Subhrajyoti07: Do you have unedited raw original to compare? I see that the original has also been edited. Brandmeister^talk 08:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Brandmeister: [4] - Straight out of camera, Raw file converted without any adjustments/post processing applied to jpeg format as requested - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ok, although I'd prefer less harsh retouching. Brandmeister^talk 16:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Yann (talk) 10:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HMCS Saskatoon with CH-149 Cormorant

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2018 at 22:22:35 (UTC)

Reason: Lede image for the article HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709) with interesting action. The image is used in seven articles.
Articles in which this image appears: HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709), Royal Canadian Navy, Kingston-class coastal defence vessel, AgustaWestland CH-149 Cormorant, and four more.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator: Rayzlens

Support as nominator – Pine^✉ 22:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Gnosis (talk) 16:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'll eat my hat if this is the work of a random Wikimedia Commons contributor, who only ever uploaded this photo in this 2010 before never posting again. It's an aerial shot of a military exercise, and so highly unlikely to have been taken by a member of the public. I note that the image also lacks metadata. This is almost certainly a Canadian Government photo uploaded under a false claim. Nick-D (talk) 11:19, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AGF should apply here. --Pine^✉ 18:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

I don't see how anyone could take this image in a personal capacity, and the pattern of a single-use account posting a professional-grade image on Commons which has no metadata is almost always associated with a copyright violation. Nick-D (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(That said, if it can be established that this is PD - for instance a US military image - then I'd definitely support it, as it's an excellent photo). Nick-D (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose must surely be military or military-authorized press image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment See c:Commons:Deletion requests/. Yann (talk) 15:23, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

St Wilfrids Church

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2018 at 18:10:19 (UTC)

Reason: A masterpiece of a beautiful church in england
Articles in which this image appears: St Wilfrid's Church, Preston
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator: Mdbeckwith

Support as nominator – LivioAndronico ^(talk) 18:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good photo, but not significant EV right now, because it is in the "gallery" section of the article. It would have more EV if it is moved to the "infobox" or to the "remodeling" section of the article. Bammesk (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done thanks --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 08:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:47, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 15:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

William Henry Seward by Randolph Rogers, in Madison Square Park, New York City

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2018 at 23:27:38 (UTC)

Reason: I'm happy with the sharpness of the monument itself, the colors of the plants/trees, and the park scene in the background. Technical quality and EV seem worth a shot at FPC.
Articles in which this image appears: William Henry Seward (Rogers), and a cropped version of the same image is in Randolph Rogers and Madison Square and Madison Square Park
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - composition is very messy and restless. --Janke | Talk 11:58, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Yes, the composition is messy, but I don't see any way to address that. The statue is in a permanent location (and obviously a very busy one). We can't just up and move it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:04, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Per Janke. Due to the setting in which it's found, it's not a good subject for main page promotion. Sca (talk) 13:29, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination clearly not going anywhere. Thanks for the comments, all. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn nomination. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dark purple Trichoglottis

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2018 at 18:18:54 (UTC)

Reason: Nominated recently (here). Updated based on feedback, but uploaded the new version shortly before the nomination period ended. I should've just opened another nomination at that point, probably. Alas. On the advice of someone who abstained last time, and since there were no opposes, I'll give this another shot.
It's a dark purple Trichoglottis orchid (Trichoglottis atropurpurea) at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden.
Articles in which this image appears: Trichoglottis atropurpurea, Trichoglottis
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging participants of the previous FPC: @Livioandronico2013, Crisco 1492, Bammesk, Marvellous Spider-Man, Tomer T, and Janke: — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:20, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support still — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too dark and concerns of the lack of focus on the flowers. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:18, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me is fine --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 09:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)4[reply]
Support although I do recognize a focusing issue on the flowers, it has very high EV. Mattximus (talk) 22:54, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 15:17, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I think the background ~~is now too dark. It was better~~ was good in this version: [5]. Also some cropping of the top and right sides would highlight the flowers as the main subject, I think it would be an improvement. Bammesk (talk) 14:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very lovely picture that adds a nice touch to the article as well. Goveganplease (talk) 01:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Dark purple Trichoglottis (70213s)c.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:21, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bust of Redmond Barry

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 08:13:02 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality marble bust, contemporary with the subject. Illustrates both the subject and the sculptor.
Articles in which this image appears: Redmond Barry, Charles Summers
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator: Bust: Charles Summers; photograph: Chris Woodrich

Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:13, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 15:16, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: How high up is the bust displayed in situ? I would usually expect to view such objects from a more-or-less eye- or face-level angle. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- With stand, the bust was about 3–4 cm taller than me (if I'm remembering correctly). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:45, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – is the face slightly out of focus? Bammesk (talk) 14:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support – face looks slightly out of focus, but not too bad at full size (100%). It has EV in Charles Summers as the only example of his work. Bammesk (talk) 03:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Scant EV. Subject and artist both shy on notability. Sca (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Antonin Artaud

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 15:26:49 (UTC)

Reason: high quality image of a famous artist, used a lead image
Articles in which this image appears: Antonin Artaud, List of atheist authors
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: unknown; uploaded, stiched and restored by JLPC

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 15:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A bit fuzzy, but considering the date, I'll support it. Kaldari (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Some serious motion blur. By the 20s, exposure times had gotten down to the point where such a problem shouldn't happen in a professional setting. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – @Yann: I uploaded a sharper version on top of the existing image. I now see that the image is assessed in Commons, so I probably shouldn't have done that. Please review and take action if necessary. Feel free to upload the sharpened version as a new file. Bammesk (talk) 17:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support – technically not high quality, but an exception for it being a historic image applies IMO. Bammesk (talk) 02:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support this photo is almost 90 years old .... it is a rare document for me the quality for a photo of 1926 is good .... I do not think it would pass as an image of quality but as a cultural document is more than enough for me --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:10, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Er, make that 92 years old. Sca (talk) 14:14, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

you're right Sca,sorry ... I meant AT LEAST 90 --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 18:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:14, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:14, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Dreux

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 23:07:29 (UTC)

Reason: high quality image used as a lead
Articles in which this image appears: Battle of Dreux
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/War
Creator: Perrissin and Tortorel

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 23:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is the category OK? Yann (talk) 23:08, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – leaning to support but too much contrast correction, too bright, IMO. Bammesk (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bammesk: The background is supposed to be white, yet there is no white pixel in the background. Yann (talk) 11:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The background (in the drawing area) [6] has a fine shade, that shade is too muted in the restoration IMO. Also the physical paper (the border) has a texture, I think retaining some of that texture could be an improvement. Bammesk (talk) 01:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bammesk: I made a new version, and a grayscale version, just in case: File:4eme chargeDreux, grayscale.jpg. Yann (talk) 12:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Nice. Better than grayscale. (sidenote: FYI, I would also support a brighter version, somewhere between the initial nom version and what you have now. Also would support less color saturation.) Bammesk (talk) 13:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Astronaut Harrison 'Jack' Schmitt, American Flag, and Earth

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 06:51:07 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution, unique photograph, taken while wearing awkward and unforgiving equipment in an unforgiving environment. Has a free license. File has description.
Articles in which this image appears: Harrison Schmitt
FP category for this image: Space
Creator: NASA/Eugene Cernan

Support as nominator – Kees08 (Talk) 06:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great image with high EV, high quality. – Yann (talk) 11:12, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Are there other versions/frames? This one has a focussing error and/or camera shake, clearly seen in full size. (The scan is OK, since the fiduciary crosses are tack sharp.) --Janke | Talk 14:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Images. Closest equivalent would be this I reckon, but I think it is worse off. Thoughts? Kees08 (Talk) 07:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at this: [7], I'd say it's a better choice, Schmitt is in focus, and there's no camera shake. If I were you, I'd close this nomination, and nominate that one instead... --Janke | Talk 09:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I am not a huge fan of the sun reflecting off the helmet in that one. I do see the camera shake when I zoom in. Just to make sure, you think the camera shake is worse than the helmet glare? Kees08 (Talk) 03:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think the shake is worse than the glare. You don't see the face in either picture, anyway. Also, the tilted composition of this one is pretty awkward. --Janke | Talk 06:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:46, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A pyrosome colony washed up into a California tide pool

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 23:06:15 (UTC)

Reason: When I came across this in a tide pool near Monterey, California, I had no idea what it was. In fact, it is a pyrosome, a colony of little creatures that floats around the ocean, connected by a gelatinous "tunic". Strange things. I think EV is the main thing here -- we have very few pictures of these, and this one depicts its unusual form/texture pretty well, I think.
Articles in which this image appears: Pyrosoma atlanticum, Pyrosome
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Others
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 13:11, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – nice photo but it doesn't have the alive-pop of the infobox photo in Pyrosome, puzzling! Bammesk (talk) 13:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bammesk: FWIW that picture in the pyrosome article may not actually be a pyrosome. The file name called it a comb jelly, its description called it a salp, and it was in the pyrosome article. :) Still there because I'm not 100% certain but see this thread for more. This of course does not change that this picture is indeed by a tidepool and not a living specimen out in the open ocean. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:13, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I checked some google images... ~~About "a tidepool and not a living specimen": is the nom image a good representation of a living pyrosome? (as opposed to a dead pyrosome) If you think it is, then~~ this is a Support vote. Bammesk (talk) 14:40, 16 June 2018 (UTC) Bammesk (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:26, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:26, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cavalry and Coca-Cola

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2018 at 18:22:26 (UTC)

Reason: This 1907 photograph is a stunning image that, in a single frame, captures the transition from pre-consumer to consumer culture; from the American
Old West to the American modern era. Prominently seen behind a troop of horse-mounted cavalry on the western frontier is an advertising billboard for Coca-Cola. The subjects of the image are in focus (there is some slight blur in the guidon where the wind has caused it to flutter as well as the rearing heads of horses, however, I think that's ameliorated somewhat by the fact this is a 1907 un-posed photo taken outdoors) and it is of greater than 1500 pixels; it is freely licensed; it is present in five articles, forming the infobox image of one; it is verifiable (both the image and its caption originating from the official state archives of Washington state
); aside from some slight leveling, it has not been manipulated. (As an aside, this is my first FP nomination so please bear with me if I've made any errors.)
Articles in which this image appears: Troop B, Washington Cavalry; Foster & Kleiser; Cavalry; Coca-Cola; Washington Army National Guard
FP category for this image: History
Creator: Chetsford

Support as nominator – Chetsford (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Could use some slight restoration. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – agree with Chris, also may be a larger crop to include the horse's feet. Bammesk (talk) 14:45, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw as nom - Chris Woodrich and Bammesk - thank you very much for this feedback! I think these are great points and I'll withdraw this for now until I can correct them and then resubmit. Sorry for wasting everyone's time but thank you, very much, for the edification! Chetsford (talk) 05:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn nomination. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]