Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

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
Eurasian coot (Fulica atra) juvenile.jpg Juvenile coot

Current nominationsEdit

La Esmeralda, Act III, Scene 2Edit

Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2020 at 19:47:30 (UTC)

 
Original – Set design for Louise Bertin's La Esmeralda. Act II, Scene 2
Reason
A fine Charles-Antoine Cambon set design, for the most notable opera of one of the most notable female opera composers.
Articles in which this image appears
La Esmeralda (opera) +1
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Charles-Antoine Cambon, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 19:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



Red-bellied piranhaEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2020 at 14:16:49 (UTC)

 
Original – A red-bellied piranha
Reason
Recently featured unanimously on Commons. Just when you thought it was safe to go in the water...
Articles in which this image appears
Red-bellied piranha, Piranha
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
Creator
H. Zell
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 14:16, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 20:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



Sándor VayEdit

Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2020 at 14:09:10 (UTC)

 
Original – We can't say their true preferred gender for certain when their passing as male gave them many, many benefits. This really shows in our article on them. Sándor Vay or Sarolta Vay was a Hungarian poet and journalist. Vay worked as a male journalist both before and after the sensational trial for his marriage to "another" woman in 1889. The case drew the attention of noted sexologists of the period, including Havelock Ellis and Richard von Krafft-Ebing, who used it to explore female inversion in the emerging field of sexology. During his lifetime, he was well respected as an author of historical articles on notable figures and cultural topics related to Hungary. Many of his works have been posthumously republished and are considered an important part of his country's literary heritage.
Reason
The source isn't perfect by any means, but it's easy to get good sources for, say, France or the UK or the US. This is rarer, and as such, I think it's worth consideration despite a certain amount of graininess.
Articles in which this image appears
Sándor Vay
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Unknown, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 14:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 15:33, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 15:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



A Composite Imaginary View of JapanEdit

Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2020 at 12:46:37 (UTC)

 
Original – Silk textile artwork from Meiji era Japan, unknown artist
Reason
Already an FP on Commons, this is a very high-resolution photograph of an embroidered artwork from a time when Japanese textile art was making great technical advances. It depicts landmarks and architectural features associated with traditional Japan.
Articles in which this image appears
Meiji (era)#Textiles, Khalili Collection of Japanese Art, Japanese art#Textiles
FP category for this image
Artwork/East Asian art
Creator
Khalili Collections



Jessie BonstelleEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2020 at 18:57:19 (UTC)

 
Original – Jessie Bonstelle was an American theater director, actress, and drama company manager.
Reason
Quality Image.
Articles in which this image appears
Jessie Bonstelle
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Bain News Service, publisher; Restoration by CAPTAIN MEDUSA
  • Support as nominator – ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 18:57, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – nice restoration, but I think it can be improved a bit. The bottom edge can be cloned a bit, there are two small dark spots above her eyebrow and some on her neck, two large bright spots on her dress which look like they don't belong there (lower right side). Also I think the shadows are pulled too low because some of her hair details are lost (see the back). Bammesk (talk) 01:39, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Reluctant oppose You set your black point too low, and her hair, and the shadow under her armpit have turned into an inky blackness. Did you save a copy before the levels adjustment? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 07:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Much, thank you. Support. I've marked a couple more things you can do with the note tool on Commons - hover over the image to see them - but they're all pretty minor. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 11:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Just be aware that I think uploading a new version deletes the notes. You might want to keep a PNG version so you can edit a lossless version if you're not - if you look at any of mine, you'll see I regularly upload PNG files as I work. Mind you, I started doing that a lot more after a couple of crashes during saves that ate my work. Also helpful if I don't finish something at the time - check out the history of [1] Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 11:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • The latest upload has a watermark and small dots to the left of her chin. They weren't there previously and can be removed. Bammesk (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



Delist: 1917 surrender of JerusalemEdit

Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2020 at 11:48:56 (UTC)

 
The surrender of Jerusalem, 1917
Reason
A person was cropped out on the left. The flag - somewhat transparent in the original, as befits one with a bright sky behind it, has been turned solid. It's just an over-manipulated image.
Articles this image appears in
19th Battalion, London Regiment (St Pancras), 60th (2/2nd London) Division, Battle of Jerusalem, History of Jerusalem, Mandatory Palestine, Partition of the Ottoman Empire, Southern Palestine Offensive, Timelines of Ottoman Syria history
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/1917 surrender of Jerusalem
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs



Juvenile cootEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2020 at 09:27:56 (UTC)

 
OriginalEurasian coot (Fulica atra) juvenile in France
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons. Juvenile looks very different to the adult bird.
Articles in which this image appears
Eurasian coot
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 09:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, although I'd improve the description in the article and move it up a paragraph next to the description of the juvenile. Been waiting for this one ever since I saw it at Commons FPC. You are a brilliant photographer, and, as such, your photographs deserve better treatment in article space than just the caption "chick". Will poke at it after dinner. Done Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 20:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 16:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)



Lilac-breasted rollerEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2020 at 09:21:07 (UTC)

 
OriginalLilac-breasted roller (Coracias caudatus caudatus) in Botswana
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Lilac-breasted roller
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 09:21, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • This is a beautifully shot bird, but the branch is a little obtrusive. Is there an alternative shot? I'm leaning support, but would like to promote the best image we have of the little guy. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 20:12, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • He's a big guy actually. I like this one as it shows the dark blue wing feathers. The whole of the bird is in focus - the other FPs are more head on and recent voters on Commons had the opportunity to compare this one with them to see if it matched up. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Support, then. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 23:11, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – On aesthetic grounds. So colorful, unlike many avian species nominated here. – Sca (talk) 13:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 16:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)



Hazel MacKayeEdit

Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2020 at 06:11:00 (UTC)

 
OriginalHazel MacKaye, actress, suffragist, and writer of various pageants and plays, many of which for women's suffrage events, as well as working with the Young Women's Christian Association and becoming their Director of Pageantry and Drama. 497.
Reason
This is honestly one of the favourite portraits I've restored. It's fun, it's not too staged, and, y'know, it has a cute dog in it. It's just a lovely picture of a multi-talented person
Articles in which this image appears
Hazel MacKaye
FP category for this image
She's again hard to classify, albeit for a somewhat different reason than Smyth: She used drama as a political weapon, so you could certainly argue Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political. But, reversing that, her political weapon was theatre, so Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment might make more sense. I defer to Armbrust's judgement.
Creator
Harris & Ewing, restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 06:11, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportAdam, there are a couple of bright spots on/near her right hand, they can be removed. Bammesk (talk) 02:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
    • @Bammesk: Think I got them all. Tell me if you see more. Always something you miss with a sufficiently big image. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 10:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • It was very rare to see! Bammesk (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Bammesk: I think I had meant to zoom out after and check the white dots weren't some feature of the image, then forgot before I finished the bit I was working on around it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 02:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)



Lawrence Alma-Tadema - Portrait of Ignacy Jan PaderewskiEdit

Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2020 at 10:07:38 (UTC)

 
OriginalLawrence Alma-Tadema - Portrait of Ignacy Jan Paderewski
Reason
Iconic and well-recognized portrait seems to be a proper representation of this musician and politician.
Articles in which this image appears
Lawrence Alma-Tadema and Ignacy Jan Paderewski
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Lawrence Alma-Tadema
  • Support as nominatorAndrei (talk) 10:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - Could be restored a bit, quite a lot of white dust particles - hardly in the painting itself? --Janke | Talk 10:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
    At the moment I have no time to check it by myself, but they seem to be present on scans from both, the museum and google. Which is unusual, because google almost always has the best quality. I might try to go to the museum next weekend. --Andrei (talk) 11:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • The original at Google Arts has better, more neutral colors. Bammesk (talk) 02:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Okay, the colors are fixed. --Andrei (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I am not sure the bright spots are scan defects, they may be ingrained on the canvas, see the bottom edge far right. Bammesk (talk) 15:40, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



Wiggle stereoscopyEdit

Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2020 at 16:12:52 (UTC)

 
OriginalWiggle stereoscopy of a street in Cork, Ireland in 1927
Reason
Good example of Wiggle stereoscopy from an early 20th century set, when the technique was relatively novel and in use. Lead image of the article, and I did more restoration recently.
Articles in which this image appears
Wiggle stereoscopy
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment
Creator
Keystone View Company, photographer: unknown, restoration: Miles and Bammesk
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Intresting, read the article for the first time as a result of nomination. --Gnosis (talk) 19:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment & leaning to oppose I don't think wiggle stereoscopy was used in the early 20th century... by what means, if true? [citation needed] Stereoscopy itself is a lot older, as old as photography, in fact. Otherwise high EV, but there are some distracting details: the uneven exposure, and the size difference top right. I think a better, modern image could easily be made. I might try doing one in the near future, possibly with more than two frames. --Janke | Talk 19:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Janke, about "what means": it didn't take much to toggle two images in 1910s and 20s (with motion picture and projector technology of the time). An easy way would be two side by side projectors projecting the two images on the same screen, and blocking the light path sequentially. Bammesk (talk) 01:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I struck/revised that part. Being novice, I drew the wrong conclusion from looking at the many slow moving and old examples in the article and in the Commons category here. There are other and newer examples in the Commons category but none are as well done (as impressive) as the nom image. I look forward to seeing your image. I think being derived from a 1920s-set makes the nom image an interesting example though. Bammesk (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 
Quick test, not for voting!
  • OK, here's a very quick test with 4 frames - it was easy to make! Effect could be stronger than in this example (of my HO railroad...) Someone else may want to try it, with a better, and "deeper" subject. Can't do it outside today, too windy... --Janke | Talk 10:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Janke: I think that's somewhat missing the point. It's a way of showing old stereoscopic images in a way that preserves their stereoscopic 3D view without the need for specialised viewers; it's not something that's generally being created intentionally. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 21:18, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Lacks general EV; annoying. – Sca (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • "General EV" is not a requirement. Bammesk (talk) 02:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment New to me, but surely the vanishing point (far distance) should be stationary, not wiggling, in which case this is a poor example. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Charlesjsharp, here is an example of what you suggest, it doesn't work. Being new, you can spend a few minutes and go through the examples at the Commons category Here (also noted above). You'll get a sense of what works just by looking at the examples. Bammesk (talk) 01:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • CommentI looked at the examples and they all use different POVs and techniques. None impressed me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Most of them don't impress me either, a stationary vanishing point doesn't work though. Bammesk (talk) 00:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose The article is really lacking in good sources to establish this is actually a notable technique. Normally I don't judge images by the quality of the article they come from, but for an image created by a Wikipedian to exemplify a technique, we need it to be pretty well-established that the technique is actually notable (just as even the most perfectly-shot portrait of a non-notable person wouldn't be an FP). TSP (talk) 21:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment From memory, this technique (or one very similar to it) was extensively used by aerial reconnaissance photo interpreters during World War II to provide an illusion of depth. Again from memory, this played a particularly important role in the campaign against the German 'V' weapons. Such images would likely have stronger EV. Nick-D (talk) 01:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • To your point, article says "many small animals bob their heads to create motion parallax (wiggling) so they can better estimate distance prior to jumping." Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment As I am always interested in learning about animal behaviour, I have examined the claim in the article that birds bob their heads in some way that illustrates wiggle stereoscopy. My conclusion (and someone else has already inserted a ‘citation needed’ template) is that there is no evidence to support this statement. Animals (like man) will move their heads to get a better view and that improves distance perception through motion parallax. Steinman and Garcia make a claim that pigeons bob their heads to achieve motion parallax. Experiments have shown this to be not true. They bob their heads to keep them still as they move, so it is for focus, not parallax. Ellard et al. undertook work on the Mongolian gerbil and found that monocular gerbils moved their heads more than binocular gerbils. No bobbing. The three references cited are only Harvard citations – there are no full citations, but I’ve accessed what I can.Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • The article says small animals, not just birds. It is unsourced though. Bammesk (talk) 00:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)



Laetiporus sulphureusEdit

Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2020 at 13:02:41 (UTC)

 
Original – Laetiporus sulphureus (underside) on Ginkgo biloba
Reason
Fairly recent unanimous FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Laetiporus sulphureus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Fungi
Creator
Agnes Monkelbaan
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 13:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Ineligible - not in the article... Maybe you meant to list the other one... ;-) --Janke | Talk 14:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, corrected. MER-C 14:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 16:53, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – Actually, it looks delicious... --Janke | Talk 19:27, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Thank you very much for nominating my photo.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)



Majipa LakheyEdit

Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2020 at 11:04:25 (UTC)

 
Original – Majipa Lakhey is a demon in Nepalese folklore.
Reason
Quality image
Articles in which this image appears
Majipa Lakhey, Lakhey, Kathmandu,
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle
Creator
Less than 3
  • Support as nominator – ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:04, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Unfortunate composition, cut off at left. Appears to be a snapshot, better photos should be easy to take. --Janke | Talk 14:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)



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 August 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.

Elizabeth Taylor 2Edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2020 at 17:40:52 (UTC)

 
Original – Film still of Taylor, late 1950s
Reason
Quality image.
Articles in which this image appears
Elizabeth Taylor
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Unknown; Retouched by CAPTAIN MEDUSA
  • Support as nominator – ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 17:40, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - GamerPro64 22:41, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • The white point is a bit high, and there is a couple specks between her eyebrows, but a strong image. I'm inclined to support, but request that at least the spots are removed. That said, the source is simply incorrect, though. File history unhelpfully says that it's a crop from another source, but doesn't name that source. This could well fail on a documentation asoect Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 07:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
I want to support, but I am a little worried about the sourcing. Going to run this by Commons quickly. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 18:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

  • While there is a clear consensus above to promote the image, it's currently not used in any article and thus it can't be promoted. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



Chorda filumEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2020 at 03:25:26 (UTC)

 
OriginalChorda filum on top of a layer of soft blanket weed (Cladophora glomerata), coastline of Sweden.
Reason
Photo of Chorda filum, underwater rope-like brown algae. The ropes are about 1 m (3.3 ft) long in this photo. They can grow to 8 m long. Lead image and FP on Commons. The ropes have a layer of short colorless hair during summer, per the article, which are visible in this photo, per photographer Cart [2].
Articles in which this image appears
Chorda filum
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Others
Creator
Cart
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 03:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • It's a bit grainy, but underwater photography is notoriously hard. Support, I suppose, since I'm sure the more photography-based people here will eviscerate it if it's not up to standards whether I'm too lenient or not, but if I am right and this is good, I'll be glad I voted to support. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 20:43, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 13:16, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Encyclopedic value, difficult-to-capture photo. (t · c) buidhe 19:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Underwater slope in Gullmarn fjord 2.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)



Quo Vadis, againEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2020 at 16:35:09 (UTC)

 
Original – Poster for the 1913 film Quo Vadis
Reason
Was rather eyeing this, the other poster in the article, back when I did the first poster. Think they make a nice complement. And, well, I just don't like the idea of leaving the second image in an article to be rather bad just because you've done one. That, like this poster, is a load of bull.
Articles in which this image appears
Quo Vadis (1913 film)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
Creator
The National Ptg. & Eng. Co. (Chicago, New York, St. Louis); restored by Adam Cuerden (Copyrighted George Kleine)

Promoted File:Poster for Quo Vadis (1913 silent film) - Lygia Bound to the Wild Bull.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)



David Ben-GurionEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2020 at 08:27:01 (UTC)

 
Original – David Ben-Gurion
 
Alt – quick test
Reason
Good quality and EV
Articles in which this image appears
David Ben-Gurion
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
Fritz Cohen, edited by Andrei Kurbyko
  • Support as nominatorAndrei (talk) 08:27, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Important person, high EV - but extremely grainy, can something be done? (Selectively, so as not to blur facial features...) --Janke | Talk 14:48, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
    • @Janke: I've never seen that end up turning out well. Best you can do is play with the curves a bit, in my experience. Also, Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 15:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
      • I think some improvement can be done, did a quick test, see alt. Someone else can do it better, I think. --Janke | Talk 16:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
        • That just looks unnatural to me. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 17:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
          • I spent less than 5 minutes on it. Someone else can certainly do it better, as I said. The grain in the background is really popping out in the original. --Janke | Talk 17:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
            • Not a photo expert, from what I understand this grain is just a feature of the photo. It is present in the original scan from the library so i guess it was made in this way. There are only less official portraits available without this "effect". But blurring some parts while keeping the face looks artificial and, on my opinion, does not help much. --Andrei (talk) 07:53, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support original. I don't like the selective blur. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support originalJohn M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 08:45, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support either – For the face – and the hair tufts. – Sca (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support original – the alt. wasn't intended for voting, just a test. Can someone (who knows how) delete the file itself, thanks. --Janke | Talk 15:32, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
    I'd keep it just in case! --2A00:F41:18E7:EBD5:C24B:F565:BE8C:5FDE (talk) 15:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:David Ben-Gurion (D597-087).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)



DeFord BaileyEdit

Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2020 at 23:37:37 (UTC)

 
Original – DeFord Bailey, the original star of the Grand Ole Opry
Reason
I have always loved this photo of DeFord Bailey. I think it is compelling, eye-catching, and so far as I can tell fulfills all the Featured Picture criteria. DeFord Bailey is shown with his harmonica in hand, a wonderful moment dating from the 1970s, when Mr Bailey was re-discovered and performed in public for the first time in decades. When I was working on Mr Bailey's article, I was able to get OTRS permission for this photo to be freely-used from Marilyn K. Morton, the photographer, and her husband, David C. Morton, Mr. Bailey's biographer.
Articles in which this image appears
DeFord Bailey, List of Country Music Hall of Fame inductees
FP category for this image
People
Creator
Shearonink
  • Support as nominatorShearonink (talk) 23:37, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - Overly high contrast, also needs restoration (probably scanned from a paper print, thus a lot of dust). --Janke | Talk 10:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Is there a noticeboard or a group where I could see about getting these possible issues "fixed"?
When you say "overly high contrast" what do you mean? Do you think the essence of the photo, the subject itself is compelling enough (barring technical issues) to be considered as an FP? I just love it so, the technical aspects escape me. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
"Overly high contrast" means that information has been lost in shadows and highlights. The original (negative or transparency) certainly had more detail than this scan. --Janke | Talk 18:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Janke Thanks for your response. Is there a WikiProject or Noticeboard around here that could take on restoration? I have no idea where to look or ask. Shearonink (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
My guess is that you would need a much better, lower contrast original scan for a restoration to be worth the considerable effort needed. --Janke | Talk 17:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Oh. Wow. That is sad since it is my understanding that this is likely the only image left of the original photograph. What a pity. Thanks for your input. I guess I should withdraw this FPC - I'll figure out how to do that later. I'll say one last time - I do love this image so. Shearonink (talk) 18:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Withdraw
I'd like to withdraw this FPC. Looks like I overestimated the charm of the photo without taking into account its possible technical issues. Shearonink (talk) 06:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)



Sphaerechinus granularisEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2020 at 13:23:56 (UTC)

 
Original – Purple sea urchin (Sphaerechinus granularis), Madeira, Portugal
Reason
Pretty decent for underwater photography, featured on Commons unanimously two weeks ago.
Articles in which this image appears
Sphaerechinus granularis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Others
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 13:23, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 02:57, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – Did somebody drop a Koosh ball into the sea? ;-) --Janke | Talk 11:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support It wasn't me ;-) . ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 17:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 17:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support --Andrei (talk) 10:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Erizo de mar violáceo (Sphaerechinus granularis), Madeira, Portugal, 2019-05-31, DD 40.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)



Golden monkeyEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2020 at 18:44:17 (UTC)

 
OriginalGolden monkey (Cercopithecus kandti) feeding on bamboo, Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well. This is an endangered species that needs supplies of bamboo to survive and its habitat is being destroyed.
Articles in which this image appears
Golden monkey
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 18:44, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – Can you make a case in the reason section of this nom regarding why or how this image adds significant encyclopedic value to the article? So that we are all on the same page and know what we are voting for. Particularly in light of your two recent oppose votes on non-infobox animal nominations, it would be helpful to have a rationale for this nomination. Currently the reason section of the nom says "Illustrates article well" which isn't literally true, because the article isn't about the feeding habit of this monkey. Bammesk (talk) 20:12, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment For animals, the unspoken rule is that a picture of the whole animal fills the infobox. This is an endangered species that needs supplies of bamboo to survive and its habitat is being destroyed. Hence I chose this one of the four images in the article. Since all the images in the article are mine, I can be objective in choosing which I believe to be the most encyclopaedic. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • The reason section is better, but it doesn't put two and two together. It should also say: the image shows the monkey eating bamboo and the article covers the feeding habit and the role of bamboo. The image needs to be captioned in the article to give it EV, stating the monkey is feeding on bamboo, otherwise readers would have no clue what the monkey is holding or doing.
About: "I can be objective in choosing which I believe to be the most encyclopedic." . . . Nominations aren't just about you, they involve the rest of us too. Noms have a reason section, so use it to communicate, to tell us what you have in mind, because no one can read your mind. Don't expect us to spend half an hour figuring out why you are doing or saying something. The same goes for when you participate in other people's nominations. Make your comments and oppose rationales clear to others (not just clear to yourself), write in "specifics" and make it relatable to the 8 numbered items in the FP criteria. Bammesk (talk) 23:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – Bamboo branch partially obscures subject. – Sca (talk) 13:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Yes, Sca, but the eating of bamboo is the purpose of the shot. I've made this clear in the article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support striking view of the subject in its habitat with adequate technical and legal specifications. I find the !opposing arguments to be wanting. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 08:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, although I suspect that another of the photos could easily ALSO be an FP. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 20:46, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – I really think an image caption in the article is necessary. Otherwise there is no clarity in the article as to what the monkey is doing or holding. Bammesk (talk) 02:53, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 12:08, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn't reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)



Blue tiger maleEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2020 at 18:39:02 (UTC)

 
OriginalBlue tiger (Tirumala limniace exoticus) male, Kerala, India
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Tirumala limniace
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Charlesjsharp

Promoted File:Blue tiger (Tirumala limniace exoticus) male underside.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)



Talamanca hummingbird maleEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2020 at 18:19:30 (UTC)

 
OriginalTalamanca hummingbird (Eugenes spectabilis) male, Panama
 
Alternate – shows more of the body
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Talamanca hummingbird
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Comment I like both, so happy for it to be an alternative. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Alt – the article is thin, hopefully it will get some attention. Charles, in removing the branch, you added a ghost beak! Bammesk (talk) 02:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • comment Thanks, error has been corrected. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:57, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Alt – but the removal of the branch should be mentioned on the file page, as all major alterations should... --Janke | Talk 16:47, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support alt Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 03:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support alt. MER-C 12:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Promoted File:Talamanca hummingbird (Eugenes spectabilis) male.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)



Ethel SmythEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2020 at 08:47:42 (UTC)

 
OriginalEthel Smyth
Reason
A high-quality photo. Took four years to get this finished, and about another 16 hours this week. Heh....
Articles in which this image appears
Ethel Smyth +8
FP category for this image
She's notable both as a suffragist and a composer. So Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Political and/or Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Unknown photographer, restored by Adam Cuerden

Promoted File:Ethel Smyth.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)



Qantas Suva to Sydney FlightEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2020 at 10:09:06 (UTC)

 
Original – Flight steward Max White at work on board a Qantas Catalina aircraft en route from Suva to Sydney in January 1949, assisted by young passenger Jennifer Grey.
Reason
This image is worthy of being on Wikipedia's featured pictures because it is the only image on Wikimedia Commons that is a picture of a commercial flight onboard the Catalina Aircraft. It is also one of the only images of a male flight attendant in the late 1940s, and hence is quite a rare image to come by. The focus of the image is quite intriguing, with a young passenger (a little girl, only about four or five) helping the flight attendant do the dishes during a commercial flight. Not only is this quite unusual (you don't see passengers helping cabin crew with their tasks), but it's also a reminder of how far flying has gone, as nowadays there is no need for cabin crew to do the dishes - everything is disposable plastic, and the cabin crew don't have to use a sink for cleaning up after in-flight meals. In regards to the other criterion, it has an image size of 1,168 × 1,836, it has a complete description including the people involved, where it is (onboard a Qantas aircraft flying from Suva, Fiji to Sydney), its source (an airline newsletter from March 1949) and is in the public domain according to the Wikimedia Commons page. It is used on the articles for the Catalina Aircraft (see below) as well as the article on Flight Attendants in multiple language Wikipedia's. The photo is also quite clear and there are no elements in the image that are distracting or obstructive. There is no digital manipulation and the image provided is verifiable with its source.

Regarding the source: Wikipedia user @Janke: has raised the fact that the image could have been taken anywhere. Thank you for raising that concern, however the girl (Jennifer Grey) has her name in one of the references of the article in the Qantas Empire Airways newsletter (titled "Jennifer Grey Goes by Air") on the PBY Catalina on reference number 23, which is referenced in a sentence about how long it took to fly from Suva to Sydney. I did an internet search for the newsletter; however, it seems that the originals are only available physically through the State Library of NSW (based in Sydney). Since @Whiteghost.ink: has been involved with the State Library of NSW in bringing their content over to Wikipedia, they may have obtained the image from their archives. Whiteghost may be able to verify this for us too. For reference, the Wikimedia Commons page is here. Edit: Several libraries host this, however it seems they are in storage or need to be physically requested. See Trove for information.

Articles in which this image appears
Flight attendant, Consolidated PBY Catalina, [3]https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_PBY_Catalina, [4]https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flugbegleiter, [5]https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegazkineko_laguntzaile, Powerhouse Museum
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others
Creator
Whiteghost.ink
  • Support as nominatorJh15s (talk) 10:09, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - there's no real and apparent EV in this photo, it could have been shot anywhere. Awkward composition, head touches top edge. Fails criterion #3 IMO. --Janke | Talk 14:44, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I feel I am missing something that is obvious to the nominator, but I can't see how this "Adds significant encyclopedic value to an article and helps readers to understand an article" or "illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more". Josh Milburn (talk) 15:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Request withdrawn Nominator asked for this to no longer be considered at their user talk page. No opinion on FP criteria. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 06:17, 3 August 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)
  • Armbrust, Ok, let's get clarity on the deletion request first, otherwise it's a moot point. Bammesk (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)