Charles does have a point. That massive photo montage at the top makes it odd to nominate something later in the article. And makes the "Balcón del Mediterráneo" look, by far, like the most important thing about the city. I'd say the image used in the article is a bit too bizarre and overstuffed to be considered stable. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs20:54, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An astronomer lass from Nantucket Found an asteroid, but Harvard said "Chuck it! No astronomer dame Such credit may claim!" (But I say that Harvard can suck it.)
Reason
While slightly undersize, the film grain is larger, so no detail is lost. Quite a good photo otherwise. I've tweaked the crop a bit - extended the right and cropped the left - to try and centre the image a bit better.
Comment My hearty congratulations to Adam Cuerden for the limerick. I'm trying to think how we can, someday, work it onto the main page. Would you mind if I forward it to someone appropriate at the Harvard Observatory? EEng22:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - exceedingly grainy, lots of dust specks, messy composition. Surely better photos exist from this important moment in time? --Janke | Talk17:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Janke, probably no better photo from this specific moment. The event only had only one photographer present, Rudi Weissenstein. You can read here some background info: "On the day of Jaffa's surrender, Weissenstein received an official invitation to attend the State of Israel Declaration of Independence signing ceremony the next day... Weissenstein was asked to keep the contents of the invitation and the time of the session a secret... He was the only still photographer invited to document the ceremony... and the historical photographs he took were published the world over."
Apparently not the only photographer - "Rudi was among the few photographers allowed to enter the hall and document the historic event" - my italics, see [[2]]. --Janke | Talk16:30, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Having one of the pictures in high resolution is great. There are other angles like this, but I prefer this version, which is the more iconic angle. If we get the picture presented here in high-res, it should also be good. Tomer T (talk) 12:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose – Technically it's not a good photo of Ben-Gurion or anyone else. The photographer was too far away from the head table for the camera he was using (a Graflex?). – Sca (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It would not pass on Commons, yes, but as I know, Wikipedia requirements are a bit different. The quality is not perfect indeed, but its just as good as it gets. Therefore, support. --Andrei (talk) 08:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Copyrighted (unless released by the photographer). The copyright would have expired in 1998 which is after the URAA date; the image is not free to use on enwiki since it is still copyrighted in US. (t · c) buidhe19:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
!@Buidhe: U.S. Copyright Decree KT 365 established mutual copyright recognition between the US and Israel in 1953that went back retrospectively to 1948.There were no copyrights to restore, as they were already recognised. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs23:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
!Adam Cuerden Well, I can't find info on this decree online, so I'll have to take your word for it. Does that mean that all Israeli photographs whose copyright expired in Israel are free in the US, or is there some cutoff date? (t · c) buidhe08:06, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2020 at 17:23:24 (UTC)
Original – Taung Child, the first Australopithecus found. File page description [1]: "Cast in three parts: endocranium, face and mandible, of a 2.1 million year old Australopithecus africanus specimen so-called Taung child, discovered in South Africa."
Reason
Taung Child is the fossilised skull of the first Australopithecus africanus discovered in 1924. The discovery established a link in the understanding of human evolution. The image is used in several articles, it shows the endocast of the skull at the University of the Witwatersrand (Evolutionary Studies Institute), South Africa.
Comment – Is this the actual skull, or a cast of it? The text doesn't clarify. I'm not talking of the endocast of the brain cavity, but of the bones. If it's not a photo of the real fossil, but of a cast made from it, then EV is lower. --Janke | Talk22:06, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit hairy! You can read the discoverer Raymond Dart's description at this link. The original finding (or discovery) has two parts: 1- a naturally formed endocast of the brain (endocranium, in human anatomy, the outer layer of the brain), and 2- a rock fused to the facial and jawbone (mandible), the fused rock was then removed and the facial and jawbone revealed. The originals are at the University of the Witwatersrand, and that's where this photograph was captured. Whether the photographed piece is the original 2 million year old find, or a copy of it cast for display purposes, I do not know. If I was to assume, I would assume it's a replica, given the photographer describes it as "cast in three parts", and given the original is 2M years old. In either case, given that the photographed item (original or replica) is displayed by the institution that houses the original finding, it should be sufficient for EV purposes. Bammesk (talk) 01:29, 30 November 2020 (UTC) . . . Looking through this source and enlarging some of the photographs, I am pretty confident the nom image is of a replica, not the original fossil. Bammesk (talk) 04:09, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I thought by looking closely at the photo; the teeth seem to be the same "part" as the skull, which is darkened by painting or other method. Let's see what people think, first - if overwhelmingly positive, I'll concur... --Janke | Talk16:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adam, properly documented where? on the article page, or on the file page? Also documented in what respect? do you mean documenting the details of the discovered fossil, or details of the item photographed (i.e. it being a replica). Anyway, it would need a renomination. Bammesk (talk) 02:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. In stable use prominently on its (short) article, high quality. It's not the lead image but the other one there is far too low-res to be a contender. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think the opening of the article says all you need know about her importance, which is a whole lot:
“
Simone VeilGrand-croixDBEnéeJacob; 13 July 1927 – 30 June 2017) was a French magistrate and stateswoman who served as Health Minister in several governments and was President of the European Parliament from 1979 to 1982, the first woman to hold that office. As health minister, she is best remembered for advancing women’s legal rights in France, in particular for the 1975 law that legalized abortion, today known as Loi Veil. From 1998 to 2007 she was a member of the Constitutional Council, France’s highest legal authority.
One of France’s most revered figures, Simone Veil and her husband were buried at the Panthéon on 1 July 2018. Her eulogy was given by PresidentEmmanuel Macron.
”
As for the image, well, it has a strong expression, is pretty good quality for a 1984 news photo. It's an award ceremony for the Four Freedoms Award, though I'm not sure how much that adds to the image's notablility given the articles don't actually mention it's from that. Still, it's high-resolution, and only as grainy as one would expect for the time.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2020 at 04:00:34 (UTC)
Original – The metal sculpture found in the Utah desert in November 2020.Alt 1 – Cropped and color adjusted by User:Chainwit., now used in article
Reason
This is a great picture of the Utah monolith - high resolution, good colors, and contributes well to the article - you really need to see it to understand it.
Comment Oppose – This topic has been globally sensationalized, with all sorts of weird speculation. We shouldn't reinforce the hype by promo'ing it on the Main Page of Wikipedia. – Sca (talk) 15:59, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sca: I don't see how that makes it unworthy of an article/FP, though. If we want to be the sun of all knowledge, some subjects may be a little silly, but we should still encourage good images.Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs19:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support either, prefer alt - it's a little grainy, but it's well above the resolution requirement, attractive, impressively swift photo-gathering and now irreplaceable. TSP (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Now I'm wondering whether the original shadowed corners were from lighting on the scene or from burning the photo after, and whether the updates mostly consisted of undoing all that burning. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:29, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Nice composition, enhanced by the distant lowering clouds. Good detail, at least in the foreground. Although the strollers on the beach at mid-ground are decipherble only at full rez, they aren't essential to the picture. – Sca (talk) 15:21, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2020 at 15:01:23 (UTC)
Original – Illustration of the relative sizes of the one-man Mercury spacecraft, the two-man Gemini spacecraft, and the three-man Apollo spacecraft. Also shows line drawing of launch vehicles (Saturn V, Titan II and Atlas-D) to show their relative size to each other and the position of the spacecraft at launch (highlighted at top).
Reason
High resolution and quality. Great illustratio of the NASA spacecrafts.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2020 at 15:17:00 (UTC)
Original – The Apollo 4 unmanned mission lifts off from launch pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center. This would be the first flight for the enormous Saturn V rocket that would eventually take humans to the Moon.
Comment This can't be right - the North Pole ice-free during the ice age? Or is it just the year 2008, which, to my knowledge, isn't an ice age... --Janke | Talk14:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The nom images show glaciation (glaciers), not all forms of ice. Glaciers can only form on a solid base or land. Another image lower in the article [3] shows the extent of all ice including sea ice. The nom images were created in 2008, so it is "as of 2008" (not just 2008). Bammesk (talk) 02:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Janke, for all practical purposes Yes. Hudson Bay, Barents Sea, Kara Sea, North Sea aren't deep (100, 230, 130, 95m average) and global sea levels were 120m lower. My understanding is that they were part of their corresponding Continental glaciers. The image creator is active on Commons and can be pinged for details. His credentials are here. Bammesk (talk) 19:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Still, without that explanation in the caption, it's nevertheless misleading. One would expect to see the entire ice cap... --Janke | Talk09:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry your diagram wasn't promoted. Understood about the light coastal shading. Guess there's no good solution – maybe except bright pink, perhaps ;-) cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ12:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support as restoration artist/partial author/Wikipedian. I used this image to paint a portrait which I donated to a local Hawaiian cultural organization. I should upload the image someday.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is pretty cool, but a pretty minor conflict of interest. I've had slightly more major ones (e.g. a few of the opera images are ones I'd like to perform with my group at some point, and it's convenient to have that ready for programs and leaflets if we want it - but it's pretty hard to see how "I want to donate this to Wikipedia - but also might use it for something else" really causes substantial conflict of interest either.) Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs19:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2020 at 10:52:42 (UTC)
Original – Entrance hall of the Eureka Inn, at 7th and F Streets in Eureka, California, a four-story, 104-room Elizabethan Tudor Revival architectural style hotel, opened in 1922.
Reason
High quality, high EV, nice composition, recently featured on Commons
Comment – Cozy in a claustrophobic sort of way, but EV seems negligible. Aside from the three presidential pix on the far wall there are no people in the room. – Sca (talk) 15:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – A lovely depiction. Oddly, though, the first targeted article fails to explain that the Palm House no longer exists (destroyed by fire in 1880), and in the second one (Pfaueninsel) the only mention is in the caption on the photo itself. – Sca (talk) 15:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – FP criterion 5 says "wait a reasonable period of time (at least 7 days)". Nom image replaced a good photo, recently. I would support if it remains stable. How about suspending the nomination (see bottom of this page) for a week (or longer) to see if it remains stable. Bammesk (talk) 04:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It has been 7 days since the image was added to the article, so I moved the nom back to the "current" section. ToprakM, the image is no longer used in the article or any other article. I checked the FP category here and we have a FP of this bomber [4], although the one you nominated has a lot more pixels and could qualify if it's in an article and is stable. Bammesk (talk) 02:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – good wow factor, it falls under the category "eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article" (from the top of this page), it makes up for the low EV of not showing the full body. It also looks appetizing :-) Bammesk (talk) 19:27, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that this is low EV - this behavior of hiding in coral is mentioned quite prominently in the article. MER-C20:40, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I struck this vote, editor has less than 100 edits. To vote you need at least 100 edits (per instructions on top of this page). Bammesk (talk) 23:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Give ScienceFan66 my support vote instead... My first reaction was: "cute, but what is it" - so it fulfills criterion #3 perfectly: making the viewer want to know more. --Janke | Talk09:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – On sheer cuteness – although I'd prefer a crop showing a little more blenny (is his name Benny?) and less coral. – Sca (talk) 16:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2020 at 06:16:29 (UTC)
Original – To quote the CDC: "This illustration, created at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), reveals ultrastructural morphology exhibited by coronaviruses. Note the spikes that adorn the outer surface of the virus, which impart the look of a corona surrounding the virion, when viewed electron microscopically. A novel coronavirus, named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was identified as the cause of an outbreak of respiratory illness first detected in Wuhan, China in 2019. The illness caused by this virus has been named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)."
Reason
Rather relevant right now, and the details are (presumably) accurate - it's by the CDC after all, visually appealing, and educational.
My comment above was in jest (note the ";-)"). In fact, the shallow DOF helps you better perceive the spherical shape. --Janke | Talk10:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Highly informative and high EV. Fits all the criteria on WP:WIAFP. In my opinion, the colors used and the virus itself do not make for an aesthetically pleasing image. However, that's not a criterion for FP. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls?20:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2020 at 20:00:13 (UTC)
Original – Collapse of Arecibo telescope captured from control tower camera.
Reason
Footage taken by a security camera at the Arecibo Radio Telescope on the day of the collapse. Completed in November 1963, the Arecibo Telescope was the world's largest single-aperture telescope for 53 years, and was a feature in numerous scientific explorations such as the SETI program and the monitoring of near Earth objects. Its most famous transmission may be the Arecibo message, which is itself a featured picture. In addition to the scientific use, the facility was featured in several pop culture shows and movies, notably in the 007 film Goldeneye and the television series The X-Files. It was been listed on the US National Register of Historic Places since 2008 and was named an IEEE Milestone in 2001. The collapse of the observatory was major news in many parts of the world, and for all these reasons I'm nominating the footage here for Featured Picture consideration. (PS: I'm about 4 hours short of 7 days of waiting, but this is a big deal and I wanted to put it out there before I go to bed, hence the slightly early nomination.) TomStar81 (Talk) 20:00, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Although it certainly does illustrate the collapse, its EV for the telescope itself – which was being decommissioned due to storm damage – seems doubtful given the video quality. Note that the target article is the telescope itself. (The story of the collapse was somewhat hyped, IMO.) – Sca (talk) 14:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It serves its purpose in illustrating a notable (if overhyped) event in the history of the telescope, which would still be a notable part of its story - the end part - whether overhyped or not. That said, it's not really emphasised much in the article compared to other images and footage of the collapse therein, so... arguably could be underused? P'r'aps we need an article on the collapse itself. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs11:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – This video doesn't show the 300 meter reflector that the telescope is known for. It only shows the collapse, and the collapse of the top piece, the beam-steering mechanism. I much rather see a nom of the whole standing telescope (in one image or a set of images). Bammesk (talk) 04:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TomStar81, I meant before the collapse, it would be nice to have a FP of it pre-collapse. Regarding the collapse: I thought it was part of a controlled decommissioning, apparently not, I didn't know it was an uncontrolled premature collapse. I am neutral on voting, but I see the significance of the video and may support. Bammesk (talk) 03:11, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This portrait is of a very high quality. The image is striking. It has good contrast, is in focus, is of a high resolution, and adds very high value to the Wesley Bell article and may add value to other articles within a similar scope, such as those related to St. Louis or the Ferguson unrest. The photo has not been digitally altered, other than to crop from the original (which can be found in the extract data on the file page). I truly feel that among portraits, this image is among Wikipedia's best work.
I'd at least be interested in seeing what that looks like. It is currently my only concern, and I don't think that level of manipulation would be problematic (it's not really an important part of the image background). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2020 at 10:00:00 (UTC)
Original – Frankfurt on the Main: Center of the Altstadt (Old Town) with the Cathedral, western part of the Fischerfeldviertel (Fisher Field Quarter) and the major part of Sachsenhausen with heavy damage and devastations of the allied bombings of World War II as seen from the air from about the Braubachstrasse (Braubach Street) to the south
Oppose besides the problems noted with the streaks, the contrast and overall resolution is substandard, it's hard to make out details like his fingers and the like. It's washed out.--Jayron3217:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A high-quality poster. A lower-quality version of it has been stable for a decade in the article. Restoration took freaking ages, but I think it was worth it.
I'd like to see if this image can satisfy WP:FPC criteria as it illustrates - in high quality - one common mode by which fumarole minerals appear; as various crusts that form through the deposition on surfaces and hairy structures that form through a more self-seeding accumulation method.
About "if this image can satisfy WP:FPC criteria": The pixel count meets the criteria, and is on the low side (1500px min). I translated and read the Russian description of the photographic technique (on the file page), the technique seems novel and unique. That's a plus IMO. Criterion 5 says "Adds significant encyclopedic value (EV) to an article and helps readers to understand an article." Currently this image is at the bottom, among several similar examples. So the significance of its EV is watered down. Usually FPs are positioned more prominently in articles. Are other images photographically superior and have more EV? If no, can this image be placed more prominently in the article (i.e. placed in article's body or in the infobox)? Can its caption be improved, in your opinion? Bammesk (talk) 04:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bammesk: Being higher resolution than the current lead image and showing the same aspects, I'd say they could easily be swapped around. My only hesitation would be that the article is also nominated for Did you know and I use the current lead image there. Regarding the caption, I think mainly removing the chemical formula and the etymology information could be improvements. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the image caption in the article (to increase its EV). I added some details to it, feel free to change it. On a sidenote: I would also support the infobox image [5], it is only 33 pixels short of 1500px, I think it qualifies for an exception, it has almost twice the pixels "per unit length" compared to the nom image. Bammesk (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that. Seems OK to me. Regarding the latter image, I dunno, would the extra EV (close-in detail of how such mineralizations look vs. showing the somewhat rougher appearance of such deposits) justify nominating that one as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can you make electron micrographs in color these days? Or is this just manually colored? If the latter, then low EV unless clearly explained. --Janke | Talk18:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I read about it in the longer Russian explanation. So it is a combination of a hi-res electron micrograph with a low-res microphoto in color. Should be mentioned in the caption, when done, count my for now conditional support. --Janke | Talk18:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2020 at 02:53:27 (UTC)
Original – A screenshot of the multi-language portal for Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia, taken in 2018
Reason
I understand this is somewhat of an unorthodox (and meta) submission, but after going through WP:WIAFP, I think it fits. This is a high-res screenshot of the multi-language portal at wikipedia.org taken in 2018. The image is centered, well-constructed, and gives a pretty good summary of what Wikipedia's about. It immediately establishes Wikipedia as "the free encyclopedia," provides the viewer with information on what languages are available and which language Wikipedias have more articles, and at the bottom of the image gives information on other Wikimedia Foundation projects. I think the webpage is laid out pretty well aesthetically, but regardless, this image certainly satisfies the "highly informative" part of criteria three. Obviously, the license is free, and it adds EV to articles related to Wikipedia. Additionally, this is one of the best licensable examples of a webserver directory index.
Comment Visual interest is subjective, but I strongly disagree that the image doesn't have EV within the scopes of both Wikipedia and webserver directory index. And besides, criterion three says that an image does not need to be aesthetically pleasing so long as it's highly informative. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It indeed looks like an advertising photo, almost too perfect... ;-) For me, it does not inspire further reading of the article. Admittedly a subjective point, but so are all the votes here on FPC. I find this photo [6] a lot more informative, although the quality is nowhere near yours. --Janke | Talk18:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Janke and Sca: There might be a case for leaving the full name of the crankset on the file description page, but the photograph being too good and too well-identified is certainly a unique reason to object to an FPC! Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs11:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as I said, it's all subjective. It's an excellent, top-quality photo in the article, but a free brand ad on the front page... --Janke | Talk18:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At least re. the micrometer, the brand name is not mentioned in the caption, since the article is about the tool itself, not the brand. That's not the case here. --Janke | Talk14:12, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, having the brand name in the image caption is not necessary, it doesn't add much, and can be removed. The manufacturer name is on the file page and that's good enough for the curious reader. On a sidenote: Drawing a line for advertisement is hard. For example the movie poster nominated by Adam above is pure advertisement. And the image even appears in the article about the movie. One could argue that the article about the movie itself is an advertisement. Yes it's an old movie, but even old movies generate profit, some are still very profitable. Regarding cranksets, it's hard to find a crankset that doesn't have a logo. That's a common place for a logo. Bammesk (talk) 14:53, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Janke,Sca: This is Wikipedia, encyclopedia. Puting idle photo without perfect description would be nonsense. To me as a cycler there is all what a cycler want to know in file description. Like putting BMW car without logo and not naming model. Whom for will that be suitable, maybe for 5 yrs old kid, who cant read yet. --Petar Milošević (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, usually a photo of a BMW is in an article about a BMW. This is in an article about a crankset, not a Shimano crankset. There is a (fine) distinction there - and, furthermore, we shouldn't bee too serious about these votes. I see FPC as a friendly discussion forum, thus Suum cuique. --Janke | Talk17:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's also not like the caption is directly what's used on the main page. If there's advertising concerns, register them here, and maybe ping @Cwmhiraeth:. But there's going to be substantially more text on the main page than would ever be practical to include in a summary here. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs02:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Clear, encyclopedic picture of the subject of the article. I don't see a problem with it having been taken by the manufacturer - pretty much every product is from some brand or other, and there doesn't seem to be any particular focus on Shimano-specific aspects. If this encourages other manufacturers release equally encyclopedic photographs of their own products on free licenses, that's great. TSP (talk) 13:53, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A nice copy of a film poster, resolution seems proportionate to the lithography grain, and the poster is quite nicely designed. And, y'know, notable film.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2020 at 11:47:00 (UTC)
Original – Svans are an ethnic group mainly found in the Svaneti region of Georgia. This is a Svan peasant photographed in Mestia, Svanetia in the late 19th century.
Reason
There's a little paper texture, but mainly in the bokeh (especially after I got to work). Otherwise, it's a strong image. We don't do a lot with the Traditional Dress category nowadays - it looks like it's been a year since the last one - but it's a viable category of featured pictures, and a historical picture of an ethnic group in the traditional dress (before it passed from everyday use) is pretty valuable. Working through some of my half-finished backlog as we reach the end of the year, so you might see an uptick in my speed for a bit as I finish up half-done restorations.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2020 at 23:32:04 (UTC)
Original – Poznań Town Hall used to serve as the seat of local government until 1939, and now houses a museum. The town hall was rebuilt in mannerist style, with an ornate loggia, by Giovanni Battista di Quadro in 1550–1560.
Oppose This is an entirely competent photo, but I don't think that it's an example of Wikipedia/Commons' best work. The blurred person moving near the building for instance isn't great. Nick-D (talk) 10:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure about the copyright. EXIF data says: "Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved". The uploader doesn't have a track record. Bammesk (talk) 04:58, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oof, I just looked through the EXIF data and the original uploader's talk page, and I'm worried you may be right. The only other message is a previous upload of a different headshot of David, which was deleted as a copyvio. I did run the original image through Google reverse image-search both before cropping and before posting here, but didn't see anything that was labeled as other than an PR photo (which are frequently released into CC by the uploader and put on political BLPs here, and which the tag seemed to indicate) or alternatively a reference to the WP credit itself. Still, if we have reason to believe it's copyrighted by AP and not CC via HRC, then it's worth deleting. (Feeling an insane emotion swing right now to go from posting an FPC to proposing deleting the whole thing.) AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2020 at 11:39:28 (UTC)
Original – Dr. Valerie Thomas in 1979 standing with a stack of early Landsat Computer Compatible Tapes (CCTs). Thomas was responsible for the development of early Landsat digital media formatting.
Support Was holding off on nominating this in the hopes of getting a better copy from NASA, but it's been a few months without response. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs00:20, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – On the positive side, this has been in the infobox since the day it was uploaded 12 years ago. It's a live concert shot and shows the band in its original lineup (most likely at their peak) which lasted until 1978. On the negative side, it looks like a snapshot. I think this is a hard photo to replace and its EV overrides its technical merits. Bammesk (talk) 19:46, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This image clearly has strong EV, but it's clearly very far from being a professional quality photo. While it's great that we can use this photo in articles, it's not an example of Wikipedia/Commons' best work. Nick-D (talk) 22:04, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This has been added to the 2020 National Film Registry class and I think, a movie that focused on the subject of drug addiction in 1955, would have enough encyclopedic value to its article and be a good choice for Featured Picture.
It's a lot better, but still only 360p. According to IMDB, the original is in 1:1.85 aspect ratio, but here, it appears more cropped than the 480p version. (Check the main titles, not the stills shown here.) How come? --Janke | Talk10:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that Adolfo Hohenstein's designs for the première of a notable opera could really fail to be notable. This one is quite pretty, and, other than a lot of dust spots - a LOT of dust spots - and some minor damage, it held up pretty well for a century-old work.
Support - Iconic scene of San Francisco. I suppose we shouldn't emphasise Alcatraz Island too much in the articles - The cars don't go there, after all - but the horizon is important to showing the street's angle, and it's a strong contender. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs08:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Face is excellent, but the uniform is pretty badly overexposed; there's very little detail left in the white, and it takes up over a quarter of the image, probably.... Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.7% of all FPs11:47, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]