Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2005

This is an archive for Commons:Featured picture candidates page debates and voting.
The debates are closed and should not be edited.

Image:Pine cones, male and female.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

norro 22:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support norro 22:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wsiegmund 22:51, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because shadow borders --FML ^hi 00:19, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 03:02, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Almara 08:26, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fabien1309 20:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC) Very good.[reply]
Neutral. Would prefer softer lighting and less vignetting. --MarkSweep 03:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral NoJhan 09:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I like it. Rex 00:15, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -CSamulili 10:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

5 Support, 4 oppose, 2 Neutral=> Not Featured--Shizhao 06:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:The Earth seen from Apollo 17.jpg, Featured

Nominate

norro 22:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Just the earth :) in a great resolution norro 22:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 09:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 06:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Yrithinnd 17:09, 29 October 2005 (UTC) Preciosa !![reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

7 Support => Featured--Shizhao 06:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Earthlights dmsp.jpg, Featured

Nominate

norro 22:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support norro 22:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Urban 03:02, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Almara 08:28, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though I think I saw a slightly lighter version somewhere over the net and I liked it even more Halibutt 10:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- YolanC 16:54, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's cool to see e.g. the lights along the Transsib in dark Siberia --SehLax 07:54, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 06:12, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - can we have a slightly lighter version? On close up, it's great, but as a thumbnail it's too dark and unreadable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Luc Viatour 09:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 12:40, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

11 Support, 1 neutral => Featured--Shizhao 06:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Amanita muscaria tyndrum.jpg, Featured

Nominate

(self-nomination) Tbc 11:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Hmm, it looks tasty (argh ;-) -- YolanC 16:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Wsiegmund 22:32, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Za 16:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - MPF 22:05, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Rex 00:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Godewind 10:56, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

7 Support => Featured--Shizhao 05:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:WigsNuremburg_gobeirne.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nomination) Wigs on display in Nuremberg - gobeirne 11:31, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Noisy, blurry, reflections on the window, and a general yellowish tinge that may not be realistic. I don't know where this is, but you could perhaps try taking it again using a tripod and a polarizing filter (if you have such things). David.Monniaux 07:00, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tbc 11:43, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Almara 08:29, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 05:58, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:RoyalRegimentWalesGoat gobeirne.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nomination) Goat mascot of the Royal Regiment of Wales - gobeirne 11:50, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Shizhao 16:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose angle, lighting, can't see the face norro 22:48, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- skINMATE 21:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose same as Norro David.Monniaux 01:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose seems funny but not excellent to me --SehLax 14:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support funny. Greudin

2 support, 4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 05:57, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sceloporus cyanogenys (aka).jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

This image shows a Blue Spiny Lizard (Sceloporus cyanogenys). -- aka 13:41, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral The background is distracting if one looks at a shrunk version of the image (if blown up, the background is blurry so it's not as bad). David.Monniaux 06:58, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Almara 08:29, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 16:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - would like to see more info about the pic (where taken, wild or zoo?) - MPF 22:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I took it in the Leipzig Zoo -- aka 08:51, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose -CSamulili 10:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support The small focus range of a macro photo is on the right place -- Godewind 08:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 Support, 2 oppose, 2 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 05:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Papio hamadryas (aka).jpg, Featured

Nominate

This image shows a head close-up of a Hamadryas Baboon (Papio hamadryas). -- aka 13:41, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support David.Monniaux 06:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Almara 08:31, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - would like to see more info about the pic (where taken, wild or zoo?) - MPF 22:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I took it in the Leipzig Zoo -- aka 08:50, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Sharp, and I love the black background --fir0002 06:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The depth of field is to small, so the hair behind the face is out of focus -- Godewind 08:18, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support norro 09:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

5 Support, 2 Neutral => Featured--Shizhao 05:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Union Station 1943.jpg, Featured

Chicago Union Station 1943

I like this one for the light effect, but what sets it out are the details -- the men in uniform, the wartime poster advising not to waste transportation and the people waiting. Dunc|☺ 18:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Get_It (Talk) 22:21, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --FML ^hi 01:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Urban 03:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Wasn't this on FPC before? I seem to recall that it was, or perhaps that was on the English Wikipedia? —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 07:44, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support David.Monniaux 06:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tbc 11:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Almara 08:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - outstanding! Halibutt 10:33, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it! --Bannus 01:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

9 Support, 1 Neutral => Featured--Shizhao 05:49, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ludwigshafen-Oggersheim_4Hochhaeuser.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

LoopZilla 08:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support LoopZilla 08:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition emphasise water... Rama 08:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 16:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - I like the contrast between this beautiful and calm lake and the skyscrapers in the background. But it's leaning and maybe not outstanding enough --SehLax 16:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Straightened (I hope!) and resubmitted below LoopZilla 08:42, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose -- skINMATE 21:37, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 2 oppose, 2 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ludwigshafen-Oggersheim_4Hochhaeuser_adj.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

LoopZilla 08:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support LoopZilla 08:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
weak Support even if the first version was sharper (I know, i'm getting on your nerves ;-) --SehLax 14:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Godewind 08:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Support => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Zenaide and Charlotte Bonaparte p1000603.jpg, Not Featured

Good picture taken in a museum of a nice work by a major painter.

Support David.Monniaux 07:26, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Technically impressive. Rama 08:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 15:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 16:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think it's quite noisy to be excellent, and the original frame is not fully cut out. --SehLax 16:54, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the painting as a work of art. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 07:45, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 16:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - as Ævar - MPF 21:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Med 09:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 14:16, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -CSamulili 10:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose don't like the picture -- Gorgo 22:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

7 Support, 4 oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Weihnachtsmarktindresden.jpg, Not Featured

I like the mood of the picture even if it is a bit chintzy Richardfabi 21:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - could you maybe reduce yellow/orange cause it seems unnatural (too me) --SehLax 16:49, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurry --Almara 08:33, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 16:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- skINMATE 21:37, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Evocative. Captures the mood well. LoopZilla 08:24, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support， 3 Oppose， 1 Neutral =〉Not Featured--Shizhao 03:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Popcorn02.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

—Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 09:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 09:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support David.Monniaux 21:28, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gmaxwell 23:10, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support NoJhan 09:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose very yellow and red. the pic is dark, need more light, more white. --FML ^hi 12:28, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ditto and less DOF -- Godewind 11:58, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --- YolanC 21:29, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Support, 3 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 12:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Schéma de principe du synchrotron.jpg, featured

Nominate

David.Monniaux 08:04, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support David.Monniaux 08:04, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, clear and striking. I would wish there to be a detailed image description norro 10:28, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --FML ^hi 14:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ What is it? —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 16:38, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, a en:synchrotron. :-) I added some explanation. David.Monniaux 21:20, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quite obviously;), anyway,

Support since it looks cool. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Not clearly freely licensed, it's "used with permission". Gmaxwell 23:09, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It is clearly licensed. We received these pictures from the copyright holder with a permission to put them on our site under an attribution license, and the copyright holder confirmed they were ok with the licence as displayed on the site. (On the other hand, they insisted about the attribution.) David.Monniaux 00:18, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - What is not clear is: does the permission extend to others? Can I put it on mysite with attribution? On en we delete such images when we can't also claim fair use. I do not see how with permission is free enough for the commons. Gmaxwell 03:29, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - They gave explicit permission by email for use with attribution, and then I showed them the page where we said very visibly The copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed., and they said these conditions were fine with them. What do you want more? A contract signed in triplicate by the director of the synchrotron facility? :-) David.Monniaux 12:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      - In copyright various rights are reserved to the copyright holder unless explicitly granted to others. use is not generally considered to automaticaly include things like derivative works, and commercial redistribution. Because these rights are automatically reserved the copyright holder must make the grant explicitly. Please see the text on the template used on Enwiki. --Gmaxwell 19:28, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      - In an IRC conversation with David it was made clear to me that sufficently clear permission has been directly provided by the source. I withdraw my objection. --Gmaxwell 20:34, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 05:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support NoJhan 09:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rama 10:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 06:02, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Darkoneko 23:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

10 support => Featured--Shizhao 12:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Eggplant flower.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

--Shizhao 15:56, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose extremly noisy, not sharp, overexposed, too much space arround -- aka 17:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose far too noisy. Gmaxwell 23:11, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Too much noise -- Fabien1309 21:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose NoJhan 09:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Almara 14:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

5 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 12:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:JarrahFence_gobeirne.jpg， Featured

Nominate

(self-nomination) Typical Western Australian jarrah picket fence (circa 1930's) - gobeirne 02:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support, though I'm not sure whether such pic belongs to any article on wikipedia. Halibutt 10:26, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's not necessary. Remember, the commons are the media library for any wikimedia project. Kindly, norro 11:37, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This image is there in fact w:en:Jarrah LoopZilla 08:49, 24 October 2005 (UTC) [reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 13:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful composition. Could be a perfect cover for a wikibook about gardening. norro 11:37, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- skINMATE 21:35, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - i like it Tbc 21:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral David.Monniaux 21:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Attractive wikipedian created image. --Gmaxwell 23:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fabien1309 20:50, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 08:09, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support NoJhan 09:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - just a fence. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral DOF very small for this big object (only the nails) -- Godewind 09:35, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

9 Support， 1 Oppose， 2 Neutral=〉Featured--Shizhao 12:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:NASA Apollo 17 Lunar Roving Vehicle.jpg, Featured

Nominate

Astronaut Eugene A. Cernan in his moon p1mpmobile. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:40, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:40, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 19:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support David.Monniaux 22:58, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 02:53, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Urban 04:39, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 05:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think, there could be better images of the moon vehicles norro 14:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 17:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

8 support, 1 Oppose => Featured--Shizhao 01:58, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Reptile_az_usa.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

self-nom, hopefully the tiny detail of finding out the actual species will be resolved once the pic gets more attention ;-) --Dschwen 12:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Dschwen 12:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support, cute, but it would be nice to know what species it is. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 15:41, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversaturated colours, blurry tail (not enough depth of field). David.Monniaux 19:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oversaturaded? That's what it actually looked like at the place the picture was taken. Cannot argue about DOF but I think it brings out the head. --Dschwen 20:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've been to such places in the US. But still... it makes the picture somewhat difficult to appreciate (not enough contrast between the reptile and the background). Maybe a different position with respect to light would have helped? As for depth-of-field, if you have a camera with semi-manual settings, you can achieve it in such sunny situations by selecting a small aperture (I realize that it's not easy when you're in a hurry). David.Monniaux 09:17, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral It also seems too red for me and DOF could be better. But I like the composition --SehLax 22:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

please check further pictures from that location for color reference [1]

Oppose--Shizhao 13:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 19:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -CSamulili 10:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Bannus 22:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 4 oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:56, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Easter-Eggs.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

—Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 13:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Tbc 18:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- the shadow on the left is cut... -- YolanC 18:27, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 19:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Português: Por causa da sombra cortada
--FML ^hi 00:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Sam916 17:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Support, 1 Oppose, 2 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Plastic-Dart.jpg, Featured

Nominate

—Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --FML ^hi 13:39, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 13:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Tbc 18:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- YolanC 18:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 19:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 05:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

7 support => Featured--Shizhao 01:53, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Keys.jpg, Featured

Nominate

—Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 13:23, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Tbc 18:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- YolanC 18:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 19:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 05:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurr, grainy, overexposed. I think, if you do a macro shot of a single object, it has to be of a brilliant quality to be featured norro 09:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I hate these lousy key rings that are not really closed. Andreas Tille 21:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack norro -- Almara 13:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ditto norro - MPF 14:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

6 Support, 3 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Featured--Shizhao 01:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Chilis.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

—Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 13:23, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Tbc 18:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- YolanC 18:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 05:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 12:33, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only the middle of the first chilli is sharp, rest is blurry. I think, if you do a macro shot of a single object, it has to be of a brilliant quality to be featured norro 09:48, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ditto -- Godewind 09:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack norro -- Almara 13:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ditto - MPF 14:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

6 support, 4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:White tigers drinking.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

Speechless, done by Shuan Lo and found by Eloquence. The FlickrLickrz try to sort quality photos from Flickr, join the team. Greudin 14:28, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Greudin
Oppose Too artificial, clinical don't like the composition norro 15:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 19:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 12:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The background gives a bit of camouflage effect, which makes that the subject doesn't come out nicely. Rex 20:11, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 03:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 support, 3 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Qiantang River Bridge.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

--Shizhao 12:39, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose nothing special comparing to existing featured pictures, is there a technological challenge about this bridge ? Greudin
Oppose bad lighting, bad composition, foggy norro 15:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ACK norro --SehLax 16:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 19:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:France cities.png, Featured

Nominate

(self-nom) David.Monniaux 07:40, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Shizhao 12:14, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak oppose nice but not scalar graphic (SVG rules) <pov>and remembers me school</pov> (I'm french) Greudin~~ Strong support it is editable. Greudin
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 19:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 04:16, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bannus 01:17, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and useful. -CSamulili 21:20, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Godewind 18:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

6 support, 2 Oppose => Featured--Shizhao 01:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pumpkin flower.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

--Shizhao 05:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - very blurry --SehLax 16:52, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurry and noisy -- Almara 13:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -Aslak 13:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Beanbags.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

Three Bean bags —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 16:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 08:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support NoJhan 09:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 02:06, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too less depth of field (front of the beanbags is blurred), overdrive colours norro 06:12, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with norro. It reminds me of some old 80s school books I once saw… Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 06:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I also agree. It looks like a cheap math book picture. Also, it seems a bit out of focus. Ironchef8000
Oppose ack norro -- Almara 13:46, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Trango_Towers_2.jpg, Featured

Nominate

Found this in Commons, thought it was deserving. Bannus 23:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Bannus 23:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
' Support'. Darkoneko 23:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 06:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice —Nat Krause 10:13, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 12:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support special --FML ^hi 19:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Tak - big rocks... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 02:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Godewind 10:51, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--FloNight 00:14, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rex 01:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Another Support, of course . . . how could anyone not?? - MPF 15:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Morven 09:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:17, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

15 support => Featured--Shizhao 03:10, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wszystkich swietych cmentarz.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

and   Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose --Bannus 22:42, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
kinda blurry. Darkoneko 23:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Urban 04:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's halloween! Tvpm 16:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wsiegmund 02:02, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Almara 08:39, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose E rulez 21:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 Support, 6 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Buzz salutes the U.S. Flag.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

I am nominating this picture because it represents one of the greatest achievements of man. It is also clear, colorful, and is unique due to the moon landscape in the background. Ironchef8000 17:03, 30 October 2005

Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I see a man who is looking at an american flag... Woaw ! There are lots of pics where we can see an astronaut on the Moon. YolanC 04:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Urban 04:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ACK. YolanC there is no image description and license given norro 09:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The image should be suggested because it has technically good features, not because "of the greatest achievements of man". Technically, this image is low resolution, bad composition, and frankly, it doesn't even look like it was taken on the Moon. Rama 10:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, why is the flag waving? There is no atmosphere on the moon and therefore no wind. Strange. norro 17:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
read this en:Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations#Mechanical_issues (point 5) -- Gorgo 05:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps he had a leak in his space suit and was blowing the flag about with that :-) MPF 15:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support This picture has gravity LoopZilla 13:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Only one sixth! Oppose - ditto YolanC. Norro - it'll be PD (USGovt), like other NASA pics. - MPF 15:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 6 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:World map.png, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nominate) David.Monniaux 23:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- YolanC 10:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rama 14:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice map with a lot of information, although the quality is not the best (grid has strong aliasing) do the lower two maps have a different scale or is it just my imagination? -- Gorgo 21:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this image. It is clear, colorful, and a very nice representation of the Earth. Ironchef8000
support, Darkoneko 23:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 06:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Could you please add more information on the image page like about how was it made, and it would be nice to have the sourcefiles required to generate the image. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 13:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The source files are found on the linked Image:World map.pdf page. (This is the second time in a row that people say "uuuh, not editable / no source files" whereas the sources were on the image description pages... Strange phenomenon!)David.Monniaux 19:47, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Arrangement too chaotical for me the two smaller circles are not labelled, the uneducated viewer doesn't know, what's shown there (the hemispheres? the poles? from north, from south?) norro 23:53, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

remember that we should not write on picture, everybody don't use "north" and "south". YolanC 07:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose E rulez 21:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Rex 01:13, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

7 Support, 4 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Patos del Parque Genovés de Cádiz.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nomination) Genoves Park's ducks. In Cadiz, Spain. Patos del Parque Genovés en Cádiz, España. Emijrp 15:53, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Emijrp 15:53, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Lightning situation was too difficult: the ducks in the background are extremely overexposured and the front ones are too dark. --SehLax 16:49, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I agree SehLax -- YolanC 16:52, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ditto Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 17:19, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad lighting -- Gorgo 21:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Bannus 00:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Almara 13:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 8 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Playa de La Caleta en Cádiz.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nomination) La Caleta beach in Cádiz, Spain. Playa de La Caleta en Cádiz, España. Emijrp 15:31, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Emijrp 15:34, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yrithinnd 17:04, 29 October 2005 (UTC) Me ha amenazado para que vote a favor :þ[reply]
Oppose doesn't do a good job of showing anything, not the boats, not the beach, and not the harbor. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- idem Urban 05:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack Ævar -- Gorgo 21:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Nowt special. MPF 15:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 Support, 6 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Araneus diadematus (Gartenkreuzspinne mit Wespe).jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nom)  European garden spider with Wasp in web - Godewind 15:21, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The picture is a cutout, from this photo

Support - Godewind 15:21, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral OK, this one is really cool. But resolution ... --SehLax 16:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Resolution is OK… Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 17:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Kresspahl 18:28, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurry, and low resolution. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is a cutout of a 5 mpx picture - Godewind 09:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Support -- Rama 14:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The image is really great, but the image quality is not that great norro 16:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose great picture, but res extremely low ( < 0.5 megapixel) and it's a little bit blurry -- Gorgo 21:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Neat—Nat Krause 10:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 02:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose res / sharpness. Darkone (¿!) 09:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Almara 13:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support What drama! What excitement! -Wsiegmund 01:50, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks plenty sharp enough to me. - MPF 15:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - nice pictureJ4nnes 18:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

9 Support, 6 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Araneus_diadematus_downside.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

--SehLax 11:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Background is a little bit disturbung, would like to see the top of the spider norro 16:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

you can see the top at all the other pics here ;-) --SehLax 17:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose nice but somehow not that great to be a featured picture -- Gorgo 21:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Almara 13:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wheat close-up.JPG, Featured

Nominate

-- Fabien1309 09:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Fabien1309 09:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - that's sharp! --SehLax 11:04, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- YolanC 16:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 22:32, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- sharp and does a great job of showing the subject, but what species of wheat is it? —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's great when viewed at full size, but to disturbing in thumb size norro 16:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
support, Darkoneko 23:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose 83.202.247.5 04:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC) please log in to vote -- Gorgo 17:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Shizhao 06:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 02:03, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 12:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --E rulez 22:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose uninteresting photo, although the technical quality is good - Rex 00:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

10 Support, 2 oppose => Featured--Shizhao 02:59, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Veliki Viharnik.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

-- Fabien1309 09:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Fabien1309 09:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose looks like an ordinary holiday shot to me even if the man may be famous or whatsoever --SehLax 11:06, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yrithinnd 17:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 05:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- LoopZilla 08:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:03, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 6 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Trollstigen Norway 2004.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

and   Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:38, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- YolanC 02:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Did you know that some crazy foreign bus driver drove down that road with no breaks? Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 10:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I hope they had some good brakes :) -- YolanC 16:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't use breaks when going down a road like that, it's bad driving style and puts too much pressure on the breaks, it's much better to just gear down. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's a good idea, anyway you will need to brake after descents, no? -- YolanC 10:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Then I wouldn't be in a slop anymore, breaking would serve no purpose except to stop the car. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 18:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - looks good, but has bad JPEG artefacts. Use less compression. --SehLax 11:03, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - a lot of JPEG artefacts. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Urban 05:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack sehlax, really bad image quality -- Gorgo 21:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Rex 00:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:03, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Support, 4 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Oriental Pearl Tower.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

--Shizhao 13:27, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ygrek 15:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Greudin
Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:39, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 12:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not an excellent point of view norro 19:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose strange orientation of the tower -- Gorgo 21:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 83.202.247.5 04:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC) please log in to vote -- Gorgo 17:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bannus 01:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 02:01, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- bad point of view, very noisy -- Almara 13:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. -CSamulili 21:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. -Aslak 13:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Competition for the Leaning Tower of Pisa?? - MPF 14:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rex 00:37, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

8 Support, 6 oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Madison Wisconsin night.jpg, Not Featured

Madison, Wisconsin

Nominate

(self-nom) - Urban 10:02, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- but low res :( Greudin
Support -- YolanC 02:32, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose norro 16:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 06:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Slavik IVANOV 12:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It may look more natural if it was darker. --SehLax 15:11, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Piotr J 13:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Nothing very attractive MPF 14:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

5 Support, 4 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rosa rugosa Frucht 1.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nom) - Fruit of Rosa rugosa (Kartoffelrose) in October on Spiekeroog - Godewind 09:10, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Godewind 16:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose over exposed, and I don't like the composition. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - cropped too much, it needs more of the foliage in view to give it its context - MPF 15:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 3 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:April 17 2005 Multnomah Falls Oregon United States.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

// Multnomah Falls, the second tallest waterfall in North America, located in the River Valley Gorge Rainforest Apollomelos 05:15, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support // Apollomelos 05:15, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 06:05, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose little DOF, overexposured sky destroys trees at the top, weather is too bad --SehLax 08:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Urban 10:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Greudin
Oppose ditto SehLax. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 03:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack SehLax -- Almara 13:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -Aslak 13:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Wow!! very atmospheric. ... "weather is too bad" - c'mon, it's a RAINforest! It's supposed to be like this! - MPF 14:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Support, 5 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:October 12 2005 Alpine Loop Utah United States 2.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

// Alpine Loop located outside of Salt Lake City, UT in the Rocky Mountains next to Sundance Ski Resort where the Sundance Film Festival is held yearly, during the fall the sky turns a brilliant blue and the leaves a vibrant yellow then fall like snowflakes Apollomelos 05:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support // Apollomelos 05:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Shizhao 06:05, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Urban 10:04, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral extra prize for the most poetic nomination text, but the photo seems not really sharp (especially at the right side) --SehLax 11:09, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
weak Oppose. Not that special. -CSamulili 10:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ACK. SehLax norro 09:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - very nice habitat pic, tho' I'd have preferred it to have a slightly wider field of view and a bit sharper - MPF 14:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Rex 15:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 3 Oppose, 3 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:51, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Araneus diadematus (Gartenkreuzspinne)1.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

self-nom Godewind 18:06, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shot against the sky, sun comes from left
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 19:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps crop a bit to the left and the right? (using a lossless crop tool such as jpegtran) David.Monniaux 22:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lighting, too less depth of field, bad image quality (see the front legs), don't like the colours norro 14:26, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad image quality -- Almara 13:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 2 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 02:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Araneus diadematus (Gartenkreuzspinne)1 crop.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

self-nom by Godewind 08:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Lighting, too less depth of field, bad image quality (see the front legs), don't like the colours norro 14:27, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Greudin
Oppose Bannus 22:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad image quality -- Almara 13:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 support， 3 oppose =〉Not Featured--Shizhao 02:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ireland-doulin-seaside.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

-- Nicola.mondinelli 12:01, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Nicola.mondinelli 12:01, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the sky is outstanding, but the isle is too dark for my taste. And the criteria for sunsets are extremly high now as we already have "some". --SehLax 15:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support LoopZilla 13:44, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I agree SehLax, the isle is one of the main subjects but it is too far and/or too dark. YolanC 21:09, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 04:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Morven 09:06, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Arty picture, but not encyclopaedia material. // Liftarn 17:59, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rogue River Oregon USA.jpg, Featured

Nominate

and   Support -- Urban 09:01, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose cut bridge, unnatural colors -- Almara 14:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support I believe colors are true. YolanC 15:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 22:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - Awsome. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:10, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, you placed this image on Template:Featured pictures candidates/Image:Olchon1.jpg, it should be on its own subpage. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed this. James F. (talk) 13:02, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:02, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I like the colors -- Fabien1309 11:20, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support ♦ Pabix ♮ 10:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, lowish resolution, and somehow I don't feel it. -CSamulili 21:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded the original, hi-res version now. Rex 15:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rex 23:42, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support How can you not feel this? Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 21:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - MPF 15:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice picture, but too much contrast/sharpened. It hurts my eyes. Would like to see the unedited version norro 21:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this one. And I do suspect the colors aren't manipulated. Morven 09:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Godewind 10:35, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

11 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral => Featured --Shizhao 06:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Olchon1.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

and   Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose too small and not sharp -- Almara 14:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 22:35, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose LoopZilla 09:46, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice pic, and plenty large enough. What size do you want??? Something so big you can't see all of it in one go? - MPF 15:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 Support, 2 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Trakai-Troki.jpg, Featured

Nominate

and   Support --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:22, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 22:35, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 23:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slavik IVANOV 12:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr J 23:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support E rulez 21:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful picture. Morven 09:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:17, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good picture, but the ships destroy it a bit. It would be better without them, but I guess that's hard to arrange. Jon Harald Søby\^{no na} 12:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful, bute low resoltion and extremely grainy norro 15:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

8 support, 1 Oppose, 2 neutral => Featured--Shizhao 06:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HvannadalshnjukurSunRise.jpg, Not Featured

Selfnomination, Dawn at Hvannadalshnjúkur, Iceland Andreas Tille 21:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fabien1309 23:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too dark --Bannus 00:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 05:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 23:58, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. James F. (talk) 13:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. That is cold. -CSamulili 21:18, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. - MPF 15:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Boring subject/composition, grainy norro 21:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose idem - Rex 00:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose what norro said --Ryanl 08:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support nordic feeling -- Godewind 10:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

6 support, 5 oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SakuraHealed.png, Not Featured

Nominate

LoopZilla 10:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose -- I do not like the special effects, I think I would enjoy more the original picture. -- YolanC 11:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I rather like it. James F. (talk) 17:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Rex 23:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 04:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - bad camera shake and blurred - MPF 16:17, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Bad camera shake? Does this guy even know what he's talking about? Take one look at the fine detail in the branches and smaller bushes and tell me I shook the camera. here and and here

Not to mention I was kneeling on the ground and using a shutter speed of 1/320sec at full wide angle zoom. Honestly. Other than that, I don't really care whether this picture is featured on the commons or not, or who opposes it. I don't ever come here, it's none of my concern. I just had to reply to that completely untrue and unwarranted comment.PiccoloNamek 01:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK then, by mucking about with those "gaussian blur, top layer transparency, blending modes, brightness", etc., gimmicks (whatever all those are!). They all for me spoil what could be a good photo . . . very much ditto to YolanC and Gorgo. How about posting the original? I'd probably vote support for that - MPF 01:13, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I don't like the effect -- Gorgo 05:20, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Over-photoshopped. Morven 09:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice pic, but too much effects --Avatar 09:52, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 support, 7 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Chicago night Illinois.jpg, Not Featured

300px|Chicago, Illinois

Nominate

Urban 08:19, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Urban 08:19, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- low resolution -- YolanC 11:27, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Boring! - MPF 16:11, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose extremely low resolution (< 0.3 megapixel) -- Gorgo 05:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose size --Avatar 09:54, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Provincetown Spit, Cape Cod, Not Featured

Nominate

-- Sam916 02:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Sam916 02:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -CSamulili 21:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Rex 23:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 12:33, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose —- Get_It (Talk) 21:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - very good pic illustrating coastal sandbar sedimentation features - MPF 16:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Avatar 09:53, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 Support, 5 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Helios_in_flight2.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

-- Sam916 November 5, 2005 at 05:43:04 (UTC)

Support -- Sam916 November 5, 2005 at 05:43:04 (UTC)
Support -- Godewind 08:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Rex 11:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- The island confuses the subject LoopZilla 14:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 16:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- agree with Loopzilla. I thought it was a launchpad of somekind. Good photo in terms of technique, but the position of the plane and island makes interpetation difficult. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I also thought it was a launchpad :-) --SehLax 13:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- yes, when it is seen in thumb, we can think it is a "sky road" or a launchpad, although it is a beautiful picture. YolanC 21:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "sky road" :) Yes, I see it too. --FML ^hi 00:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - a rather interesting volcanic crater island, but too much obscured by that contraption in front - MPF 16:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- That contraption is actually what the image is supposed to illustrate. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 00:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - You missed the sarcasm :-) (yes, I know it's hard to spot in text . . tho' that island is actually very interesting and would be worth a pic in its own right) (anyone know where it is?) - MPF 01:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Background too distracting/confusing, especially in thumbnail. I like the picture, but it's not up to Featured quality IMO. Morven 09:01, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Don't show the plane. // Liftarn 17:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - looks mich better in higher resolutions --Avatar 09:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 support, 7 Oppose, 3 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Peter and Paul's Cathedral Chandelier 1.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

 This is a charming piece of church decoration, which I've finally been able to capture well. An alternative view is availible here. Beny Shlevich 19:06, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beny Shlevich 19:06, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 00:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Rex 11:01, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Inbarigami 11:14, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose –- Urban 13:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad composition --SehLax 13:51, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 12:33, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fascinating chandelier, but I don't like the composition (this would work better as a vertical) and the background makes it too hard to distinguish the chandelier especially in thumbnail view. I would recommend the use of a camera with a larger image format and a wide aperture to set the background out of focus, which would make the chandelier much more visible. Morven 09:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I see the opposition to this picture is quite overwhelming. In light of your comments, would you consider the view I've provided to be more suitable? Beny Shlevich 20:52, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support LoopZilla 22:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose composition --Avatar 09:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 6 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 06:47, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sitta europaea wildlife 3.jpg, Featured

Nominate

Jojo 14:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Jojo 14:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! I like it -- Godewind 16:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Tak --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:10, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- YolanC 21:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Get_It (Talk) 00:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -CSamulili 21:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr J 15:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - MPF 16:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Would like to see it in its natural environment norro 21:37, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Morven 09:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - A bit too much hand and too little bird. Should be cropped. // Liftarn 17:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Avatar 09:56, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Too much human flesh but nice pic — Tvpm 17:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

11 Support, 1 Oppose, 1 neutral =>Featured--Shizhao 06:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tarantula Grammostola pulchra, Not Featured

Nominate

This image shows a tarantula of the species Grammostola pulchra. -- aka 09:11, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose LoopZilla 09:46, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 00:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Urban 04:44, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Rex 11:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hard to distinguish from the background, not much detail, looks very 2d/flattened. Morven 09:06, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the full resolution? -- aka 09:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral background may be natural, but for presenting the spider it should be brighter --Avatar 09:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Oppose， 2 Neutral =〉Not Featured--Shizhao 06:40, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Russula emetica1.JPG, Not Featured

Nominate

Piotr J 11:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support Piotr J 11:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - MPF 16:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alice's Wonderland --FML ^hi 22:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support E rulez 21:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Somehow uninteresting and i don't like the black edge and the bright branch/cable in the background norro 15:17, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Rex 21:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Avatar 09:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Tvpm 17:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

5 Support, 3 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lizard.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

—Evdaimon

Support - Piotr J 13:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Support - Need to know the species - MPF 16:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the English name and have added it to the summary Evdaimon

Thanks! Changed to support with the identity (assume this is allowed?). A location would be good, too - MPF 01:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Location added too, I'll think about it for my next uploads. Thanks for your support ;) Evdaimon 17:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support- --Hans Koberger 10:29, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose foreground, cut norro 21:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 02:02, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose-- Urban 05:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Godewind 10:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral cropping the pic could help --Avatar 09:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – see Norro – Rex 22:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Support, 4 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:37, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mission San Xavier Arizona USA.jpg, Not Featured

File:Mission San Xavier Arizona USA.jpg

Nominate

—Urban 05:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Urban 05:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - spoilt by scaffolding - MPF 16:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack MPF, extremely scenic, but unfortunately there is this big ugly scaffolding in the middle of the picture -- Gorgo 05:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support holà qué tal, una cerveza por favor, sorry for my bad spanish. Greudin
Support --「Twice^29.0 · contributi · talk」 16:01, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 02:02, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Tak --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack MPF. -CSamulili 20:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral of course without scaffold it will be much better --Avatar 09:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Tvpm 17:22, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

5 Support, 4 oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 03:36, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Suricata.suricatta.6861.jpg, Featured

Nominate

A meerkat —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 20:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 20:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support —- Get_It (Talk) 21:09, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support — YolanC 21:57, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Rex 00:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Godewind 08:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Piotr J 12:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – MPF 16:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support --「Twice^29.0 · contributi · talk」 16:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support E rulez 21:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - beautiful. Morven 08:59, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very nice picture. Liftarn 17:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - sweeet :) --Avatar 09:52, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support 82.225.77.14 23:25, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support — really love it — Tvpm 17:22, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support – FoeNyx 10:04, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

15 Support => Featured--Shizhao 03:34, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Peter Rally1.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

// Liftarn 18:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – Rex 01:45, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose size --Avatar 09:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:15, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose low res -- Gorgo 23:54, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:43, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Araneus diadematus (Spider underside).jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nom) Nightshot of a european garden spider (body diameter about 5mm). Cutout from a 5mpx photo. - Godewind 14:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support- Godewind 14:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lighting, composition. Don't think, it's a good idea to do this shot at night norro 15:09, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose composition --Avatar 09:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The composition is the spider itself. So many details, not to see in real view. For me a good new experience. -- Godewind 17:31, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:15, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 08:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kresspahl 12:37, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 2 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:43, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tursiops truncatus head.jpg, Not Featured

300px|Tursiops truncatus head

Nominate

--Shizhao 01:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Shizhao 01:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - not in the natural environment and nothing special. -CSamulili 18:13, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - ditto to CSamulili - MPF 20:19, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Urban 06:06, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Avatar 09:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Evdaimon 10:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nice image, I also think it's silly to oppose it because the dolphin isn't in its natural enviroment since there's no way to tell without reading the image description (i.e. it's not like it's a monkey behind bars). —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 20:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is easy to tell by the swimming-pool blue-white water . . . I never read the description :-) MPF 12:40, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – not very special, just the head – Rex 19:57, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Really good ! -- Fabien1309 14:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --○rz 10:28, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support --FML 18:58, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I really don't mind this being in captivity - its not so obvious. Its pretty obvious on Image:Red Panda.JPG, but I really don't mind it there either. -- Solipsist 09:40, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ack CSamulili -- Gorgo 01:24, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ygrek 17:29, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

9 Support, 5 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:42, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lac noir alsace.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

Lac Noir in Alsace, France with the hydroelectric power station —Lionel Rich 21:15, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too dark, too uninteresting in thumbnail (better at full size), doesn't look straight to me. Morven 08:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Shizhao 03:15, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. What Morven said. -CSamulili 20:12, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Rex 21:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Avatar 09:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LoopZilla 20:08, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thumbnail contrast is a problem of wikimedia siftware, not of the picture. The actual image is rotated 0.6° so it should look straight. --Ikiwaner 22:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Get_It (Talk) 02:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support — I like. Tvpm 17:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3 Support, 5 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:WW2 TitlePicture For Wikipedia Article.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

and   Support. Image for Wikipedia World War II article, designed for Wikipedia by User:Dna-webmaster. Excellent job. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 05:29, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not a bad picture in a book-cover kind of way, but I don't think this kind of composite picture is really what I'm looking for in the Featured Picture category. Morven 08:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ditto. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:20, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose idem - Rex 01:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (strongly). Looks like the cover of a cheap WW II DVD. The title font is crappy and unprofessional; putting the Omaha Beach landing photo first and making it larger than all others lends the imagery a distinct American bias and ruins what could be at least a reasonable chronological arrangement (if you swap the bottom two pictures). Even then, it is a largely stereotypical collage that sensationalizes more than it explains. It has an amateurish feel to it that, in my opinion, taints the article it is associated with.--Eloquence 05:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same reasons as above. Sounds like the cover of some sensationalist paperback history book. David.Monniaux 00:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose seems to only perpetuate the simplistic a priori view that people would have before reading the article. Wikipedia is there to teach things to people, not to reinforce the blurry impressions that they have on things without educating themselves. Rama 16:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Avatar 09:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 02:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A quite collage that seems to be trying to imitate a movie poster, which is extremely bad tact and quite tasteless. It would be decent, though not worthy of being featured, if someone could only remove the "titles". / Peter Isotalo 15:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 Support, 9 Oppose => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Clematis - Etiole Violette.jpg, Not Featured

Nominate

(self-nom) Purple clematis (Etiole Violette) --Ryanl 21:22, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ryanl 21:22, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – flower cut, background – Rex 00:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - nice comp, good use of focus, nice colour balance -Dev 16:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Too close up. Don't show the flower. // Liftarn 17:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, see above. -CSamulili 18:13, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, Urban 07:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Avatar 09:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice composition, but very bad exposure: The blue parts of the flower are blue because of underexposure of the green channel, they would also look violet in nature. The image might look pleasable but should strongly not be used for clematis articles in WP. --Ikiwaner 22:01, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2 Support， 6 Oppose =〉Not Featured--Shizhao 01:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]