Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2018 at 10:15:16 (UTC)
Original – Finnish soldiers crossing the old 1939 border (Treaty of Tartu) during the 1941 offensive phase of the Continuation War against the Soviet Union. The crossing is from Tohmajärvi, Finland, to Pälksaari (now the area of Ozero Pyalk-Yarvi, Russia). Regaining the old border, lost during the Winter War, had been presented by the Finnish government as one of the justifications to launch the war.
Reason
Historic and good quality image illustrates the article and event well
2nd iconic candidate pic of Finland in WW2 and by far the best one of any "border crossing" pics from the war. I've tried to make the caption neutral as possible, but this event had profound effects and moral scrutiny attached to it. I believe some authors have called the point of crossing the old, original border turning the war from "national defence and righting the wrongs" to "foreign conquest." Likewise, the Allies pressured Finland to stop their advance after the war became morally more ambiguous. The title of the pic is an amended translation from the original caption "Miehet jättävät rajan taakseen" = "Men leaving the border behind." I've cropped a watermark and scan remnants, but otherwise left it alone. Manelolo (talk) 10:27, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Ack! After further research and verification, this is a pic from the start of the invasion and not the "old border" in fact; the caption left by a former editor on the pic had me fooled. Apologies, will amend text on the file page accordingly and repropose later. Manelolo (talk) 12:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see the crack in the lower right corner, which could be digitally repaired although I think that its small size and its placement makes it be unnecessary to repair unless someone is motivated to do so. I think that the white specks on Ansel's coat are "pills" which should be left alone for historical authenticity, since they are not dust on the photograph. I am less certain about the specks on his pants, but upon close inspection I agree that they are probably imperfections that could be repaied. --Pine✉20:28, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Janke: In EXIF you can see Color space:Uncalibrated. Resulting "its can be seen with fake colors" on some browsers etc. Normaly should be in RGB space - even BW. --PetarM (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If that's your only reason for opposing, I uploaded a new version in RGB, slightly adjusted curve (contrast) and even fixed the crack in the lower right corner... Feel free to revert if you don't like it. --Janke | Talk19:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2018 at 21:05:01 (UTC)
Original – Finnish soldiers raise the flag at the three-country cairn between Norway, Sweden and Finland on 27 April 1945 after the end of Lapland War and thus, the end of World War II in Finland.
Reason
Historic and good quality image illustrates the article and event well
Comment – Unfortunately, a very unbalanced composition. I would support only if the image would be cropped as seen in the previous low-res uploads (check the image page). Do that crop in hi-res, and I'll support because of the historical significance and the very high EV. --Janke | Talk07:17, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – An interesting footnote to the history of WWII, which in Finland was complicated. Not too bad for a 73-year-old B&W, but I'm not sure there's enough readily accessible visual info for TFP. The crop helps some – could be more on left & bottom, maybe even a bit on top. Sca (talk) 15:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good quality image, nice expression of the subject, best photograph of the subject that the encyclopedia has to offer, took by a professional photographer
Oppose – Face of subject shadowed, distracting background. Target article is a stumpb, and was created only today. Sca (talk) 14:59, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
He means that the photo was added to the article today. Usually, an added photo has to be stable in an article for some time before FCP. --Janke | Talk20:59, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- What's with the light streaks from top down - are they in the original, or an effect of the lighting? Is that the shadow of the frame on the right and bottom left? If so, it needs to be removed, or the photo re-shot. If it is intrinsic to the painting, nothing can be done, obviously. A surly looking madonna, for sure - Mona's smile is better... ;-) --Janke | Talk17:02, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Janke. Unfortunately it is a painting on a table not on canvas, and the table is not perfectly smooth, it is a bit swollen ... calculating that this painting is from 1509 (!). Those on the left are shadows, I did not want to cut them so as not to cut the painting.Probably inspired by the mona but Raffaello probably saw it only once. Thanks --LivioAndronico(talk)23:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2018 at 19:21:41 (UTC)
Original – The prang of Wat Arun, lit against the night sky, seen from across the Chao Phraya River
Reason
Good quality photo of one of Bangkok's most iconic buildings. I like how the lit prang contrast against the night sky. The near-perfect symmetry isn't easily obtained either. (I note that there's a ghost boat to the left, but I don't find it particularly distracting.)
I agree. And I've looked, but it appears lighting conditions don't favour great daytime shots of the temple. The temple is on the west bank of the river, so afternoon shots are inevitably back-lit. Most early morning shots I've seen have the smaller northwest prang in the shadow of the central one, and by the time the sun rises high enough for the shadow to subside the light becomes pretty much too harsh. There are probably a few months where the sun rises at just the right azimuth to create the perfect lighting, but I wouldn't hold my breath. We already have quite a few night FPs of architecture, and Wat Arun is one of those structures that are most picturesque under night lighting. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To me the people are part of the story. It's a tourist attraction. People go there. Lots. In this image they are present but not in a way that (I think) distracts the viewer. Daniel Case (talk) 02:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Thanks, Nergaal. I think it has plenty of encyclopedic value, too :-) Please let me know if any changes should be made. Thanks, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ00:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Embedding uses an image tag with a "data:image/jpeg" etc MIME type and Base64 encoding to include a bitmap within the SVG. If that's truly a problem, I'll update the globe with a polar map. The issue is that the file size will increase, and unless I find an orthographic projection, the globe won't be as accurate as the current one. Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ23:29, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Are all these orbits (at least nearly) equatorial? If they are, then I would support but if not (which I suspect), then the image is misleading, and in that case oppose, unless a proper explanation is made in the caption. The little earth as a raster image doesn't bother me. The animation and highlighting is nice, but it works only on the original file. --Janke | Talk16:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit) I noticed the orbit explanation on the file page, but it needs to be in the caption, at least in some form... --Janke | Talk17:06, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note, Janke. How about To let their sizes be compared and attributes read off the scales, orbits are flattened to appear perpendicular to the image; most of the orbits are actually at significant inclination. ? Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ00:38, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but nevertheless, keep the caption as short as possible, and include it on this page, too. Maybe the Earth shouldn't rotate, I feel that it further increases the chance of "equatorial misconception"... ;-) --Janke | Talk09:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done (see above). I feel the Earth rotation helps understand GEO, and the second sentence in the caption sufficiently makes it clear that most orbits are inclined. Any thoughts, anyone? cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ23:43, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
SupportConditional support, provided explanation is added per Janke's concerns. Wow. It's a shame that there's no support for inline SVG, and that the thumbnail appears so ugly, but I don't think there's anything in the FP criteria that discourages such animations. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2018 (UTC), 13:54, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a "link" parameter to the thumbnail so that it directly loads the SVG when clicked. The file description page is still accessible via the ⧉-like icon. Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ23:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nergaal, kind of you to say that. I feel illustrating is my way of giving back to the community to educate the next generation, and don't really pursue glory. Of course, I'm touched whenever someone like yourself thinks it worthy of recognition! Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ00:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The point (I see) for FPs is that they get featured on the mainpage. If nothing else, some more people will notice your work. Keep up the great work. Nergaal (talk) 02:16, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The caption still needs an explanation about the orbits not being equatorial (see above). OK, I see it's Done, so no objections anymore... ;-) --Janke | Talk09:51, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]