Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

  (Redirected from Wikipedia:FPC)
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.

Promoting an image

If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

For promotion, 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-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.

The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.

Delisting an image

A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:.If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.

  • Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.


Step 3:
Transclude and link

Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (direct link).

How to comment for Candidate Images

  • Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
  • Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
  • You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

How to comment for Delist Images

  • Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
  • Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
  • Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
  • You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
Please remember to be civil, not to bite the newbies and to comment on the image, not the person.

You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.

Editing candidates

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Highlight test image.svg
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Colortest.png
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
To see recent changes, purge the page cache.
FPCs needing feedback

Current nominationsEdit

GismondaEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2020 at 17:01:04 (UTC)

 
Original – Poster for the Paris première of Gismonda.
Reason
80+ Megapixel scan of a poster from a notable opera by a notable composer, based on a notable play by an even more notable playwright. Article on the opera could be longer, but it's also used in the play and playwright's articles, and FPs can help draw attention to articles.
Articles in which this image appears
Gismonda (Février), Gismonda, and Victorien Sardou
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Georges Rochegrosse, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 17:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent restoration. (t · c) buidhe 02:56, 13 July 2020 (UTC)



Tatev MonasteryEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2020 at 14:45:29 (UTC)

 
Original – Tatev monastery and surroundings
Reason
Detailed view of Tatev monastery and its surroundings. Sidenote: first nom [1] showed more of the surroundings but it was less detailed and a slightly stretched photo.
Articles in which this image appears
Tatev Monastery
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 14:45, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 16:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)



MarthasteriasEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2020 at 13:08:41 (UTC)

 
Original – Spiny starfish (Marthasterias glacialis), Madeira, Portugal
Alternate – CSS Image crop, better DOF
Reason
About to be featured on Commons. Blurriness mitigated by high resolution and degree of difficulty.
Articles in which this image appears
Marthasterias
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Others
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 13:08, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
    Support the alt too. MER-C 16:29, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support either, prefer Alt, I introduced an alternate by the same photographer. It is just as detailed at the same magnification of starfish, and it has better depth of field/focus. Bammesk (talk) 15:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)



Bombing of Concordia Vega oil refinery in Ploești by USAAF B-24s, 31 May 1944Edit

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2020 at 23:42:32 (UTC)

 
Original – Bombing of the Concordia Vega oil refinery in Ploești, Romania by B-24s of the United States Fifteenth Air Force on 31 May 1944
Reason
High encyclopedic value, looks cool
Articles in which this image appears
Consolidated B-24 Liberator, Combat box, Strategic bombing in World War II, Bombing of Romania in World War II, United States Strategic Bombing Survey, Catherine Caradja
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator
Richard R. Ganczak (USAAF bombardier), restored by Buidhe
  • Support as nominator – (t · c) buidhe 23:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – there are two dark spots, in the middle near the bottom, they don't look they belong there, I think they can be cleaned up. Bammesk (talk) 01:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
    •   Done, thanks! (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Genuine war picture, not staged... ;-) Those little black clouds are from flak fire - the photo might be added to that article, too. --Janke | Talk 10:26, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 19:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support : DreamSparrow Chat 15:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Widely reproduced action shot showing what a World War II heavy bomber raid looked like Nick-D (talk) 00:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC)



Kefermarkt altarpieceEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Jul 2020 at 11:21:03 (UTC)

 
Original – Top right wing of Kefermarkt altarpiece, depicting the birth of Christ
Reason
As far as I understand the criteria, I believe this picture meets them. It has high EV and sculptures are somewhat underrepresented among the Featured Pictures. I would actually like to nominate the whole set of the four panels of the altarpiece, but can't find any instructions on how to do it, if it's at all possible.
Articles in which this image appears
Kefermarkt altarpiece
FP category for this image
Sculpture
Creator
Uoaei1
  • Support as nominatorYakikaki (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose Currently, this image is part of a gallery. There isn't much commentary on each part of the panels, so I'm not seeing the contextual significance expected of featured pictures. However, this could easily be remedied by expanding the article with commentary about each part, removing the images from the gallery and putting them alongside the prose. (t · c) buidhe 11:28, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • @Buidhe: Thanks for your comments and suggestions, I think they make a lot of sense. Unfortunately though, I've been going through the sources I have and don't think I have sufficient material for a proper expansion of the article, at least not at the moment. Is it possible to close this nomination and, if I eventually manage a meaningful expansion, re-nominate the set? Thanks for your help, I'm rarely in this part of Wikipedia. Yakikaki (talk) 12:53, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Hold on, I think I've managed to find a really useful source among my books actually. Sorry for the mixed message, but I think I could be able to address these issues and get back soon with an improved article and use of the images. Yakikaki (talk) 13:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
  • @Buidhe: Can the current setup convince you? I've expanded the article (and will probably keep adding a few things later since I've managed to find good sources) and re-arranged the pictures. I think this is the best I'll be able to do for the panels, and still keep them coherently together and in a place within the article that makes sense. Yakikaki (talk) 13:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Struck oppose. (t · c) buidhe 13:40, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – soft top left corner, but EV and a nice article expansion. Bammesk (talk) 01:15, 10 July 2020 (UTC)



Delist: Suicide of two Japanese Imperial MarinesEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2020 at 16:37:27 (UTC)

Courtesy collapse of graphic content on a page not about the graphic content, and which is being actively used for other content
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
 
Two Japanese Imperial Marines who committed suicide by shooting themselves rather than surrender to U.S. Marines, Tarawa, Gilbert Islands in the Pacific.
Reason
I don't want to delist this for being graphic. We've had dead bodies on the Wikipedia mainpage before; we'll probably have them again. But it's such a bad reproduction of the photo that my urge for not censoring the main page wars with the overblown whites and dismal dark of the shadows. It's from 2007. That probably explains a lot.
Articles this image appears in
Battle of Tarawa, Death and culture
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/December-2007#Suicide_of_two_Imperial_Japanese_Marines
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs
  • DelistAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 16:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist quality is not sufficient. Well under 1500 x 1500 px, even without the lighting issues. (t · c) buidhe 21:41, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist --Andrei (talk) 07:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist Same reason as my oppose back then: Quality low, and in no way a unique picture. --Janke | Talk 15:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)



Romanian AthenaeumEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2020 at 09:27:13 (UTC)

Reason
High quality
Articles in which this image appears
Romanian Athenaeum, George Enescu, George Enescu Philharmonic Orchestra
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Poco a poco
  • Support as nominatorTheFreeWorld (talk) 09:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Nice image, but I'm not seeing what EV it adds that's not in the lead image of the article. (t · c) buidhe 09:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    @Buidhe: I have replaced the infobox image with this one, it's better. MER-C 13:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - harsh lighting. MER-C 13:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)



Saint Anne (wall painting)Edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2020 at 07:49:11 (UTC)

 
Original – Saint Anne (wall painting)
Reason
High EV, one of the most well known and described examples of Nubian art
Articles in which this image appears
Saint Anne (wall painting)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
Creator
Unknown, scanned by National Museum in Warsaw
  • Support as nominatorAndrei (talk) 07:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support high EV. (t · c) buidhe 07:52, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 10:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Not the most visually impressive image, but high EV. It's uploaded by the museum, so that removes any worries as regards the photograph. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 15:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)



Kartik Naach (32461707477)Edit

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2020 at 11:14:46 (UTC)

 
Original – Two people performing Kartik Naach.
 
Cropped – Two people performing Kartik Naach.
Reason
It decpits Kartik Naach preety well.
Articles in which this image appears
Kartik Naach
FP category for this image
Culture and lifestyle
Creator
S Pakhrin
  • Support as nominator – ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Unfortunately, bright light in background spoils this image. Fails Criterion 3. – Sca (talk) 12:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose quality is not good enough unfortunately, strange artifacts appear on the left side of the image. (t · c) buidhe 21:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • No, the artifacts are still there and I agree with MER-C's point about the composition. (t · c) buidhe 13:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - poor composition: cut off on bottom. MER-C 13:35, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above --Andrei (talk) 07:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)



Cardamine pratensisEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2020 at 09:47:03 (UTC)

 
Original – Meadow cuckooflower in the Hain area in Bamberg
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC last month, where it was featured unanimously. Well executed focus stack.
Articles in which this image appears
Cardamine pratensis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
Ermell
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 09:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Nice image, but I really think that a flower FP should show stamen & pistils to have enough EV. Easy to reshoot such an image. --Janke | Talk 10:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)



Delist: File:Anschlusstears.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2020 at 01:40:37 (UTC)

 
Sudeten German woman cries while performing Nazi salute during the annexation of Sudetenland, 1938
Reason
Unfortunately, the image looks overprocessed (compare lower res Bundesarchiv version). It also has limited encyclopedic value because this reaction was decidedly the minority one among Sudeten Germans.
Articles this image appears in
Previously used in History of Czechoslovakia where it has little EV; I replaced with File:Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1970-005-28, Anschluss sudetendeutscher Gebiete.jpg as sadly this was a more typical scene. Not currently used in any mainspace articles.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/June-2007
Nominator
(t · c) buidhe
  • Delist — (t · c) buidhe 01:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist Not being used is enough to delist in and of itself. Exceedingly harsh shadows. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 16:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist – unused, and this version shows more of what there was (more encyclopedic). Bammesk (talk) 23:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist - It's a misleading, cropped version of a much larger picture. -- Veggies (talk) 15:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delist. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:36, 12 July 2020 (UTC)



American officer and French partisan crouch behind an auto during a street fight in a French cityEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2020 at 01:30:57 (UTC)

 
Original – A French partisan and an American soldier in a French city, 1944.
Reason
Highly historically valuable image. The quality could be better, however in my opinion the historical value and compelling human interest of the image outweighs its flaws.
Articles in which this image appears
French resistance (lead image), History of France, Sten, cover of a book (different version)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator
unknown US Army Signal Corps soldier, uploaded by National Archives bot, restored by User:Buidhe
  • Support as nominator – (t · c) buidhe 01:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 09:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment There's a line on the cheek of the man who's standing up a bit more; I think it's an artefact as it looks misplaced for a scar. There's also a speck roghtly left and slightly down of the nose on the crouching figure. Minor specks elsewhere, including on the left... gendarme (?)'s face, but those seem the most important. Otherwise, looks pretty good, but I do like a little bit of extra attention to faces. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 16:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
    • @Adam Cuerden:   Done all these things (hopefully) — this is the first photograph I've tried to restore to FP quality, so I really appreciate the feedback! (t · c) buidhe 19:25, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
It looks good. There's still a bright spot on the cheek of the left man in the kepi in the back, which I'd remove as well, but Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 19:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is an obviously posed photo with little EV - if this was really a "street fight", why would French gendarmes be standing together in the background making themselves obvious targets, and what's the soldier in the background doing just hanging around with his gun in its sling when the American soldier and resistance fighter are in combat? And why was the photographer standing in the street between the supposed fighters and whoever they were fighting to take this photo? A high proportion of "combat" photos from World War II were posed, but usually not as blatantly as this. Nick-D (talk) 11:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    • If you look at the French resistance article, you can see that virtually no photographs show the French resistance in action, they are all either post-liberation or show prisoners in German captivity. So unless there are better images to be had, I think this one retains significant EV. (t · c) buidhe 11:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Nick-D raised legitimate questions about this photo. It actually looks staged. --Gnosis (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. We have historically blocked FP for photos that, like this one, have subjects who appear to be identifiable but have not been identified. Knowing who they were could go some way towards clarifying the seemingly-staged nature of the photo. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    • It's not unusual for the protagonists of a famous photograph to be unidentified. The Osprey book which has the photograph on its cover does not give their names or any additional information than is in the NARA caption, nor can I find it anywhere online. (t · c) buidhe 21:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • I disagree that a staged photograph necessarily lacks EV. This painting does not accurately depict the Battle of Austerlitz, rather it is a staged composition, but it is used as the lead image because we have no better images to use. I submit that this case is much the same, as it is dangerous to take photographs when combat is actually occurring. Should we delist Adam Cuerden's opera posters because they are promotional, not particularly realistic, and don't perfectly represent the opera in progress? (t · c) buidhe 21:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    • My concern here is that this is a badly staged photo. The photographer didn't even ask the guys hanging around in the background to get out of shot. Nick-D (talk) 08:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose - It's certainly staged, but the frightening lack of firearm safety by that lieutenant is astounding. He's about to shoot the Frenchman in the leg. Yikes. Not good in terms of realism or professionalism. -- Veggies (talk) 16:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
    • Maybe the safety was on?? ;-) --Janke | Talk 19:17, 12 July 2020 (UTC)



Les HuguenotsEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2020 at 00:02:40 (UTC)

 
Original – Depiction of Act II in the original production of Meyerbeer's Les Huguenots.
Reason
A fine illustration of Act II in the original production. Adds significant value by showing a significant piece of the work.
Articles in which this image appears
Les Huguenots
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Célestin Deshayes; restored by Adam Cuerden



Nominations — to be closedEdit

Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.

Older nominations requiring additional input from usersEdit

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

Closing procedureEdit

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.

When promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
    • Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
    Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Add the image to:
  3. Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
    The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
  4. Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
  5. Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
  6. If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
  7. Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  8. If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the July archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Delist closing procedureEdit

Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  3. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.

If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Recently closed nominationsEdit

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Crepidotus variabilisEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2020 at 00:47:46 (UTC)

 
OriginalCrepidotus variabilis, specimen is 9 mm (0.35 in) in diameter.
Reason
High quality lead image. Closeup of Crepidotus variabilis, a fungi species. This specimen is 9mm in diameter. The species doesn't have its own article, the image is used in the genus article Crepidotus.
Articles in which this image appears
Crepidotus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Fungi
Creator
Famberhorst
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 00:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment I think you'd be better off nominating one of his many FPs. This one is not one of the best. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Charles, I suggest you do your homework first and check the file description page before making statements like that. This was voted 17 to nil on Commons [2]. This is just a cropped version, cropped for infobox (too much empty space for infobox). Also, don't cast aspersions, be specific when you comment, calling something "not the best" doesn’t mean anything, it's just an aspersion unless you say why, do you object the focus, the colors, or what? Lastly, Commons FP is not a requirement. I know you want it to be, but it is not. Bammesk (talk) 10:17, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Steady on, my friend! I didn't object, I commented. I didn't spot it was FP because the file description page makes no mention of FP because you uploaded a crop of a Famberhorst FP. I can't be expected to notice that it is derived from an existing file - that's not "homework"! You should mention this in the nomination "Reason" to help voters. I didn't vote for the FP as it is too soft for my taste and has a weird halo, but I do not oppose Commons FPs here on technical grounds as the majority decision has been made. I am not obliged to support though. You are of course entitled to upload modified versions of other people's photos, but I hate it when people do it to mine. I think one should always ask the authors if they are still active. Also, you've made a mistake on the catgegories as you have duplicated the image in FP categories. Your crop is not FP at Commons, so this and the user categories need to be removed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • The onus isn't on nominators to show you a Commons FP nom, Commons FP is not a requirement here at en-WP. When you comment, the onus is on you to do it right (regardless of vote). You suggested the image quality isn't up to Commons FP, wrong, it is, and wrong because Commons FP is not a requirement, and then you didn't say why, another wrong, and this last wrong is a big deal. "This is not one of the best" on its own is meaningless. It is an opinion, but it says nothing about the image. When you write a negative critique, say the specifics upfront, say it is the focus and the halo, and say it upfront, not after a back and forth. . . . . Uploading a crop as a separate file doesn't need an ask. . . . . The categories were automatically assigned by CropTool, not me. They were inherited from the original. You can drop a note at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard, there may be a reason for it. Bammesk (talk) 14:32, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)



La bohéme, Act IIIEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2020 at 19:27:17 (UTC)

 
Original – Advertisement for the music score of La bohème
Reason
A fine poster, advertising the music score, contemporaneous with the first productions, with art by the same person as designed the costumes for the première (hence, I presume, the date: The opera premièred early 1896, but a lead time would get 1895 for the art easily.
Articles in which this image appears
La bohème
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Adolfo Hohenstein, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 19:27, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 01:52, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Does not add significantly to article. Need poster for First Performance in Italy/the one in the infobox. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:19, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • I'd say a major, major opera can have one FP per Act. And many have (see Aida). The only requirement for an FP in the line of what you propose is that the article is robust enough to hold them, and that they aren't redundant to each other - each shows something differently valuable. Otherwise, we're in a situation where we're basically saying every image but the first in an article should never be improved.
If we go by your requirement, why should anyone **ever** improve anythng but the main image of an article? Why bother photographing juveniale birds? Why would I put 10 hours into restoring any image but the lead?
That requirement leads to terrible mediocrity. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 14:37, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
I get all this. Is this performance in France particularly significant? I would argue that an image of a juvenile bird could qualify as "Featured pictures are images that add significantly to article", but I would normally nominate the infobox image first. Many of my "second in article" nominations fail here e.g. the panther chameleon current nomination which I suggest adds hugely to the article, but voters here disagee. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:01, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
To paraphrase Bammesk's reasoned oppose vote below. An image of an early performance in Italy, has more EV than a later performance in France. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:15, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Allow me to clear up a misconception: This is from the first production worldwide, by the costume and prop designer for the first production, and predates the first production in France by three years (and the first production worldwide by a couple months). The Ricordi publishing company was basically Puccini's patron. I presume Italian versions of this same advertisement exist, but Italian libraries are pretty, er... locked down to us. It's by the same exact artist, and same timeframe as the poster at the start of the article. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 15:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Oppose struck. I normally support the image that adds most value to an article (I thought we all did) and I'd be interested how Bammesk sees this issue, comparing his oppose of my nom of the reptile. I think we should be consistent. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
How I see what issue?! Bammesk (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I was referring to your comment 'the one in the infobox has more EV', which is what I'm arguing here (though not opposing). 17:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
About the reptile nom: my quote is "a full body photo, like the one in the infobox, has more EV." [3] It has more EV not because it is in the infobox, it has more EV because it is a full body photo. By saying "like the one in the infobox", I meant "such as" that photo, I meant to point you to it. I used commas, one on each side, to isolate it as an example photo. The comment's rationale was "a full body shot .... has more EV". And I inserted an example in the dotted lines. I elaborate more in the reptile nom. Bammesk (talk) 19:01, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Look, I don't think we should be falling out over this. The community here is generally very mutually supportive. I'm going to take a short break and see you all later. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:18, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Advertisement for the music score of La Bohème, 1895.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)



Battle of AusterlitzEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2020 at 07:30:35 (UTC)

 
Original – Painting of the Battle of Austerlitz, 1810 (five years after the event)
Reason
High encyclopedic value, visually appealing
Articles in which this image appears
Lead image in Battle of Austerlitz, War of the Third Coalition, and Napoleonic Wars. Used in several others.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/War
Creator
François Gérard
  • Support as nominator – (t · c) buidhe 07:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - could use a slight level correction in the shadows - details get lost in the darkest parts. --Janke | Talk 13:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – Who's who? – Sca (talk) 13:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment The filename was confusing or incorrect because it seems this painter was not commonly known as Pascal; I've changed it accordingly. I also adjusted the shadows. (t · c) buidhe 22:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – this was nominated previously: [4], [5], the scan comes out to 11 pixels per inch of canvas, not very detailed. Bammesk (talk) 03:35, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Request withdrawn I didn't realize that this was nominated before. Although I was unable to find any higher-resolution/better quality photographs online, hopefully one will be uploaded in the future. (t · c) buidhe 04:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:06, 11 July 2020 (UTC)



Julie d'Aubigny reduxEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2020 at 16:47:20 (UTC)

 
OriginalJulie d'Aubigny (1670/1673–1707), a.k.a. Mademoiselle Maupin. In a dramatic life with many lovers, she created several rôles in notable operas - as well as having the contralto voice type in opera created for her (if our article on Tancrède is to be believed), and inspired a book by Théophile Gautier.
Reason
It's passed Commons, and, as far as I can tell, only didn't pass here a month ago because of a low point of participation around the time of its last nomination. More information at that nomination.
Articles in which this image appears
Julie d'Aubigny
FP category for this image
It's a judgement call, but probably Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment.
Creator
Unknown artist, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 16:47, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support impressive restoration job. (t · c) buidhe 23:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 01:43, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment I think it would be a good thing to sort out the citations etc. first. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:00, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
    • @Charlesjsharp: I'd say that's less of an issue at FPC, and more of something that needs done before POTD. Given we're in the middle of COVID-19, and libraries are closed, I think it's reasonable to kick that down the road a bit. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 14:14, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
      • Quite a few lines in the article seem anecdotal. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
        • Agreed, but this is FPC, not GAC. Definitely something to be worked on, but I think an FP can be used to drive people to articles to improve them, so am not too worried about them if they're above a certain level. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 19:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 18:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support || DreamSparrow Chat 17:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:48, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Mademoiselle Maupin de l'Opéra (Julie d'Aubigny).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:02, 11 July 2020 (UTC)



Lucy Arbell as Queen Amahelli in Massenet's BacchusEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2020 at 16:23:04 (UTC)

 
OriginalLucy Arbell as Queen Amahelli in Jules Massenet's Bacchus
Reason
Nice view of the costume, and the opera being one of the most obscure Massenet operas means that there aren't a huge amount of resources for it, so it's a lucky find. There's a couple other options - a closeup of Arbell's face, and one that I'm not quite convinced is from Bacchus, whereas this one has some very strong evidence. Beyond that, there's a few set designs, but that's more for when the article's more developed.
Articles in which this image appears
Bacchus (opera), Lucy Arbell
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Paul Nadar, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 16:23, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support impressive restoration job. (t · c) buidhe 09:45, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment The articles are a bit thin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:04, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
    • A bit, but given Bacchus's lack of modern performance history, it's not excessively so. Only thing missing, really, is a plot summary, which, again, is probably to do with it being a foreign-language work without modern performances. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 19:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 18:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support : DreamSparrow Chat 16:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 09:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Lucy Arbell as Queen Amahelli in Massenet's Bacchus, wide view.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:56, 11 July 2020 (UTC)



A pressure ridge with lenticular clouds in the sky.Edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2020 at 12:10:16 (UTC)

 
Original – A pressure ridge in the Antarctic ice near Scott Base, with lenticular clouds in the sky
Reason
High quality
Articles in which this image appears
Pressure ridge (ice), Lenticular cloud, Earth, Scott Base
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
Creator
NASA/Michael Studinger
  • Support as nominatorTheFreeWorld (talk) 12:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 17:00, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment. Very pretty, but a little noisy, and the EV in its current use is questionable. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – agree with David above. It can be placed in pressure ridge (ice) article for example or lenticular cloud. Bammesk (talk) 02:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – The cloud appears to emanate from the ice... This would need an explanation. --Janke | Talk 09:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose technical quality not there. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:09, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Charlesjsharp--Andrei (talk) 07:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:28, 11 July 2020 (UTC)



Soyuz TMA-13Edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2020 at 08:44:33 (UTC)

 
Original – The Soyuz TMA-13 spacecraft, carrying Expedition 18 Commander Michael Fincke, Flight Engineer Yury Lonchakov and American spaceflight participant Richard Garriott, launched Sunday, October 12, 2008, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.
Reason
An restored image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Soyuz TMA-13
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator
NASA/Bill Ingalls, restored by Lošmi
  • Struck vote, sorry but per instructions on top of this page editors must have at least 100 edits to vote. User currently has 83 edits. Bammesk (talk) 02:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Soyuz TMA-13 Edit.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)



Suspended nominationsEdit

This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.

Emmy NoetherEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 22:13:19 (UTC)

 
Original – Mathematician Emmy Noether, early 1900s
Reason
Emmy Noether, one of the top mathematicians of 20th century, contributed to abstract algebra and theoretical physics. Several contributions are named after her, including Noether's theorem which is the mathematical framework of conservation of energy. Following her death, Einstein wrote a letter in the New York Times (May 5, 1935) in recognition of her contributions [6]. The image is shy of the 1500 pixel count, but I think this qualifies for an exception. The image is historic, has high EV and good composition. The original is 1450×2085 pixels, I uploaded it for reference. The white periphery had always been cropped, because it fits the articles better that way, so after doing some minor touchups I cropped the periphery to what it was.
Articles in which this image appears
Emmy Noether, List of things named after Emmy Noether, Conservation of energy, Women in science, List of female scientists in the 20th century + others
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
Creator
Mathematical Association of America (MAA)
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Per nom really: this is a high quality photo, and looks great in the infobox. Nick-D (talk) 01:24, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 10:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. The iconic image of a top mathematician of any century, not just the 20th. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
  • True. David, it would be nice if you wrote her main page blurb. Cheers. Bammesk (talk) 01:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support | DreamSparrow Chat 16:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Lemonreader (talk) 04:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: The image lacks a tag explaining why it is PD in the US. This should be provided, with evidence. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I updated the tags, but can't find a source for its publication pre 1925. Bammesk (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Then why are you so sure it was published pre 1925? Josh Milburn (talk) 06:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose until the copyright situation is cleared up. We really can't be promoting images that only might be public domain. Josh Milburn (talk) 06:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I can't find a source so I am not sure it was published pre 1925. Here is what I found (I am not a copyright expert, so correct me if I am wrong). These two sources [7], [8] suggest copyright ownership by her family (in footnotes: Emiliana and Monica), which suggests copyright ownership by Emmy Noether herself. 1- if the image was first published pre 1925, then it is PD in U.S., 2- if the image was first published after her death in 1935, then it is PD in U.S. 70 years after her death, i.e. post 2005, 3- if the image was first published between 1925 and her death in 1935, then a copyright renewal must have been filed 28 years later, from 1952 to 1963, or else the image is in PD in U.S. I did a search for her name in the online copyright registration and renewal records from 1952 to 1963 and found reference to only one item, this book. The book was first published in 1930 (volume 1) and 1931 (volume 2) in Germany, and multiple later editions exist. Whether the book includes this photo (at the time a 20 year old photo) is unlikely, but it is verifiable. Bammesk (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
The English translation of the book is available at the internet archive volume 1, volume 2 (published around 1950). I looked through them and there are no images or photographs in them. I placed an inquiry at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard diff. If there is no clearing up of the copyright, I would have no objection to withdrawing this nomination. Bammesk (talk) 23:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)