Commons talk:Featured picture candidates

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Featured picture candidates.

• This is not a forum for general discussion of the page’s subject.
• Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
• Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
• New to Commons? Check out the project scope. Ask questions, get answers.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26
candidate list

Changing the wording on formats?

When you create an FP nomination, you get prompted to select a format for your nomination:

• "landscape <!--change to portrait (<0.8), panorama (2.0-4.0), widepano (>4.0), or square (0.8-1.25) if appropriate-->".

Over the years this has been a source of confusion for nominators who don't know the proper English names for the different formats; it still is. Even seasoned nominators get this wrong and select "landscape" for any photo depicting a landscape and "portrait" for photos of people, regardless of the image's format. The size of the image on the nom page is usually corrected by one of the maintainers, but I think it would be better to if we changed the wording so that the formats are easier to understand. I suggest we use the format words used on Wikis that are less ambiguous, plus skip the confusing numbers and rearrange a bit. Something like:

• "horizontal <!--change to upright, square, panorama, or widepanorama, if appropriate-->".

What do you think? --Cart (talk) 18:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

 Support as someone who correct many nominations. Yann (talk) 18:34, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

 Support as someone who needed someone to correct a nomination --Kritzolina (talk) 19:01, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Fixed Hopefully I didn't forget any step with the code. Please let me know if something is wonky. --Cart (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Add vertorama. --Mile (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Good catch. Added as 'verticalpanorama' since the term 'vertorama' is not widely used and the instructions should be easy to understand even to people who are not familiar with photography lingo. --Cart (talk) 09:29, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Can we use the old ones? Because "upright" sounds wrong; that's usually substantially smaller than portrait on-wiki. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

But that is exactly the term that is most confusing to commoners not familiar with English photo lingo Kritzolina (talk) 07:01, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Adam, like Kritzolina says, the "portrait" is the term causing the most trouble since this is a multi-language site, and people take it literally. Most folks think it refers to the content of the image, not the format. "Upright" is the term used in the wiki-code for images in "portrait" orientation, so it's the one that most users are familiar with. And no, "upright" does not make make an image smaller than "portrait" on-wiki. Using "upright" in an image code identifies the image as having that format (upright/portrait) and makes it about the same area as an image with "horizontal/landscape". An image should take up roughly the same space in an article, regardless of the orientation it has, unless there is a special reason for displaying an image smaller or bigger than normal thumb. However, if you use "upright" on an image that has "horizontal" orientation, it will of course become small. See examples below.

There is also the possibility that you have used "portrait" in the wiki-code... Since it is not a term recognized by the wiki-code, it will be simply be ignored, and the image will be displayed with the width of a "landscape/horizontal" image. That might be why you perceive that term to yield larger images. See examples below.

But, since I understand that it might be hard for longtime users to break with old habits, I have re-written the the code to accept the old terms "portrait" and "landscape" too, even if they are not written as examples in the instructions. So you can continue with the words you are used to. --Cart (talk) 11:34, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I meant more that "upright" is used on the non-commons wikis to shrink an image to 70% of the width of a basic thumbnail - which isn't what it's doing here. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Examples:

Code for horizontal orientation: [[File:G5 aurora over Tuntorp, Lysekil Municipality 22.jpg|thumb|]] gives you: A normal thumb-sized horizontal/landscape image Code for upright orientation: [[File:G5 aurora over Tuntorp, Lysekil Municipality 27.jpg|thumb|upright]] gives you: A normal thumb-sized upright/portrait image Code for horizontal orientation on an upright image: [[File:G5 aurora over Tuntorp, Lysekil Municipality 27.jpg|thumb|]] gives you: A too large upright/portrait thumb-sized image Code for upright orientation on a horizontal image: [[File:G5 aurora over Tuntorp, Lysekil Municipality 22.jpg|thumb|upright]] gives you: A too small thumb-sized horizontal/landscape image Using the word "portrait" in the code of an upright image: [[File:G5 aurora over Tuntorp, Lysekil Municipality 27.jpg|thumb|portrait]] gives you: A too large upright/portrait thumb-sized image, since the word "portrait" is simply ignored in the code

How is result determined?

As I'm quite new to FP, can someone explain how the result is determined? About my image (File:View across Slok reservoir to Belchatow power plant 4.jpg), it had 5 supporting and 2 opposing votes. Why exactly was it "not featured"? Guidelines say:

If an image is listed here for ten days [✓] with five or more reviewers in support [✓] and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support [✓, 5 of 7 is more than two thirds].

There are also other images with 5/1 votes etc. that were declined. Have the rules changed? Or do I understand something wrong? Plozessor (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Plozessor: I think you are quoting from the English Wikipedia's FPC process? (en:WP:FPC). The process is similar here, but we have much more participation so the minimum number of supports is 7. The two-thirds rule still applies, and is firm (no "generally regarded"). — Rhododendrites ^talk |  14:19, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

• Yes, you have read the rules on the English Wikipedia. Wikipedias in different languages have their own rules for FPs on their sites. Some Wikis just "borrow" their FPs from Commons, but some have their own assaments. Here on Commons the rules are a bit different with regards to number of votes and days. You can read the full Commons rules on COM:FPC#General rules. --Cart (talk) 14:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

  Ahhhh y, I read those before but somehow missed the relevant part. Thx! Plozessor (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Users who only vote one way

• I wonder what I can do about this user Mile? On my last 10 (successful) FPCs, he has two other opposes this one, this one, 3 negative comments, 3 ignored, 0 positive votes (last few months). On my current nomination, he has opposed while other users have been helping resolve technical processing challenges. Should I take this to Commons User Problems? He has many current support votes (and no opposes) for others' wildlife images. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

  As I mentioned earlier, my suggestion would be to consider talk to him or ignoring it entirely if this user gives you that impression or makes you feel that way. Viewing this section as a space for receiving feedback rather than a competition for more FP might change our perspective. Wilfredor (talk) 18:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Opposing suggestion

What do you think about this?

Any and all oppose vote must have a reason consistent with the aforementioned guidelines.

★ 16:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

It seems logical but it is well explained like this Wilfredor (talk) 18:09, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Some incidents happen sometimes. ★ 19:01, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

IMHO it was very rude of you. Users should be free to express their subjective point of view on photos, who are you to say that what Poco says is not important? I think that no user should be able to overrule another user's vote. Wilfredor (talk) 19:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Being rude is politicizing an plural environment like a FPC nomination page. Expressing a opinion (even political) ≠ Opposing on a FPC nom page. ★ 20:06, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Everything in this world is political and users should feel comfortable rejecting an image that goes against their ideals, beliefs, technical aspects, values, etc. Wilfredor (talk) 20:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Pinging all FPC users as of August 5, 2024

Poco a poco, El Golli Mohamed, Wilfredor, Lošmi, PetarM, Jakubhal, George Chernilevsky, Thi, Karelj, Zzzs, Needsmoreritalin, Augustgeyler, Yann, Famberhorst, Milseburg, Granada, Basile Morin, Laitche, Ermell, Tomascastelazo, Agnes Monkelbaan, Frank Schulenburg, Aristeas, The Cosmonaut, UnpetitproleX, Ikan Kekek, ABAL1412, BigDom, XRay, Snowmanstudios, Giles Laurent, W.carter, King of Hearts, Fæ, VulcanSphere, SHB2000, GRDN711, Radomianin, Rjcastillo, Cmao20, Moheen, Kritzolina, Rhododendrites, Draceane…

 Disagree:

1. That would certainly be nice, but I doubt whether there is really always a reason in relation to the guidelines. I've seen a lot of comments that simply say "no wow" and it can happen that this is enough to reject a picture. In my opinion, the obligation would lead to more such blanket comments. It would be enough for me if we continued to maintain a friendly atmosphere. This is a wish based on the experience that there are some people who, to be honest, also write rather impertinent comments. --XRay 💬 05:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
2. --A.Savin 07:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)