Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/May-2024
Featured picture tools |
---|
Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 May 2024 at 10:13:15 (UTC)
- Reason
- Unanimously featured on Commons two weeks ago. Headline image.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Antiopella cristata
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Molluscs
- Creator
- Roberto Strafella
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment – Perhaps the image should be cropped? There is too much of a dark background. ―Howard • 🌽33 19:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment – According to EXIF, this was taken with flash. Looks like it's been edited for a spotlight effect, which looks unnatural. --Janke | Talk 06:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – Good nomination, but per Janke, looks very unnatural. Kentuckian |💬 14:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 May 2024 at 10:06:19 (UTC)
- Reason
- Featured without opposition on Commons last month. Headline image.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Ibn Khaldun etc.
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
- Creator
- Reda Kerbouche
- Support as nominator – MER-C 10:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – The brick wall's a distraction, but not enough to drop the EV or quality. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Personally, I like the brick wall. Kentuckian |💬 01:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Moonreach (talk) 14:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Giles Laurent (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Question: What is with that wire on right side of face (his left side) ? --Petar Milošević (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't look like it belongs there! I say let's edit it out. Bammesk (talk) 02:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- It thought it (was) a part of head scarf and "moved" out somehow. Or someone did mistake with editing. Mistake definately. --Petar Milošević (talk) 15:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Bust of Ibn Khaldun (Casbah of Bejaia, Algeria).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 May 2024 at 15:49:02 (UTC)
- Reason
- Good visualization of a neutrophil (a type of white blood cell) neutralizing (phagocytosis, or eating) a bacteria in human blood, invitro. Good addition to two articles.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Phagocytosis, Neutrophil
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Biology
- Creator
- Andrei Savitsky
- Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 15:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Moonreach (talk) 15:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Top EV. --Janke | Talk 16:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 18:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ―Howard • 🌽33 19:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support yooooo this goes hard. look at that little guy munch. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:33, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Giles Laurent (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Нейтрофил крови человека фагоцитирует бактерию.webm --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 May 2024 at 13:43:41 (UTC)
- Reason
- Featured picture on commons. Quality photograph of the painting, provides EV to its pages where its linked to.
- Articles in which this image appears
- From Copenhagen Stock Exchange, Børsen, Peder Severin Krøyer, Grosserer-Societetet, Sabinus Seidelin
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
- Creator
- Photographer: User:Villy Fink Isaksen, Painter: Peder Severin Krøyer
- Support as nominator – Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 13:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 18:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – ―Howard • 🌽33 19:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Good nomination and excellent EV. Kentuckian |💬 01:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – --Janke | Talk 06:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Giles Laurent (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Fra Københavns Børs.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 May 2024 at 19:54:32 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality reproduction of a document. Provides a lot of EV in the only article which it appears in, in that it is a direct relic of the Dawes Plan itself. Good POTD for October 15 2024 (100th anniversary of this document).
- Articles in which this image appears
- Dawes Plan
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War I
- Creator
- Unknown authors and graphic artists; Scan from Ersten Deutschen Historic-Actien-Clubs e.V.
- Support as nominator – ―Howard • 🌽33 19:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Kentuckian |💬 01:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Are the colours natural? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 16:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Conditional support- A good nomination with adequate EV, but (per Adam's query) I came across File:Dawes Anleihe 1924 1000$.jpg and saw the colors are way off in the nom. I am not sure which is closer to the original because a Google search also returned at least half a dozen color reproductions of the bill. If we could get a very good source or a scan (maybe the nomination itself) to prove the current nom is the original/closer to the original color, I'd support. Good luck. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Now, after searching across various sources, I have discovered many variant scans of this document, even by auction houses. Here is a list of the variants I have discovered:
- https://www.fhw-online.de/de/FHW-Auktion-101/?AID=88485&AKTIE=Deutsches+Reich%2C+Deutsche+%C4ussere+Anleihe+1924
- https://www.hwph.de/historische-wertpapiere/losnr-auktnr-pa4-952.html
- https://www.hwph.de/stocks-bonds/losnr-auktnr-pa9-1116_en.html
- https://www.hwph.de/stocks-bonds/losnr-auktnr-pa34-461_en.html (PDF containing images)
- https://www.scripoworld.com/records/germany/germany-1924-7-external-loan-dawes-loan/
- Every one of these scans have slightly different colors, contrast, brightness, whatever. And I am not sure which is the true correct version as I am no scripophile myself. Is it possible that during the printing of the loans that different colors were used? Is it possible that most of these scans are of forgeries? I was unable to find any definitive source for any questions, but a good place to look might be German Dollar Bonds issued between 1924 and 1937 by F. Paul Seabrook. However, I am not able to access the book as it appears the book is not available online or print in any way, shape, or form. This blog post on Tumblr attests to its existence and describes it, but I can't find an entry on Google Books, or WorldCat, or even an ISBN. ―Howard • 🌽33 17:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Now, after searching across various sources, I have discovered many variant scans of this document, even by auction houses. Here is a list of the variants I have discovered:
- Lots of these notes were issues
over many years. It makes sense that not all had identical color tones, fine details, etc. The uploader seems legit. They have 2000+ uploads of similar (historic) documents. Translating some of their talk page posts Here shows the uploader is part of a group or informal organization (also see their file 'source' descriptions). I doubt the uploads are manipulated in any significant way. But I don't know much about old prints though. Perhaps Adam can judge the integrity of the uploader's work by looking at some of their other uploads. Bammesk (talk) 02:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment As someone who has scanned aging documents extensively, the colours look reasonable to me. The marks along the top edge are in the same range, indicating that whatever has caused the lightening of the paper happened before the damage that resulted in the brown spots. The greens at the top are slightly lighter, while the blacks seem to have held their tone better; if this were artificial, I'd expect the blacks to likewise be lighter. I do feel that the cutout could have been a bit better, however - the bottom still has some unnatural straight lines. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- You don't find the purple-to-yellow-to-purple gradient off for the background paper? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 22:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- It definitely feels more like some sort of uneven fading due to sub-optimal storage than a technical flaw with the scanner. I no longer have the documents, due to changes in my situation, but this certificate and this poster (also on the other side) both had uneven fading. Admittedly, those were on a much browner paper (and indeed the fading is skewed yellow, rather than the green tone of the nomination). I personally don't think the image is FP quality, due to the blemish, but I don't feel like it's beyond the realm of possibility for this scan to be reflective of the document. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Looking at the available images of these documents online, it does seem to be a common issue. This one is clearly not a reproduction of our digital copy (has the full emblem, as well as the tickets) and has similar fading issues. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- You don't find the purple-to-yellow-to-purple gradient off for the background paper? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 22:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Searching for "Dawes Anleihe 1924" on Goggle images returns many similar examples. This being a banknote, could the background paper gradient been in part intentional (a security feature)? Bammesk (talk) 13:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Potentially? I'm also seeing images like this, which notably has a black instead of a red emblem, and this, which was overstamped. There could have been different printings, with some variants to show series, but I'm not sure. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- The note itself says $110 million was issued, and the denomination is $1000, with 1924 technology. It's plausible that several batched were printed over time, and that the color tone and other fine details weren't exactly identical. For instance among the examples linked to above I see at least two similar, but different, hand written signatures on the lower left corner. Bammesk (talk) 17:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Searching for "Dawes Anleihe 1924" on Goggle images returns many similar examples. This being a banknote, could the background paper gradient been in part intentional (a security feature)? Bammesk (talk) 13:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment As someone who has scanned aging documents extensively, the colours look reasonable to me. The marks along the top edge are in the same range, indicating that whatever has caused the lightening of the paper happened before the damage that resulted in the brown spots. The greens at the top are slightly lighter, while the blacks seem to have held their tone better; if this were artificial, I'd expect the blacks to likewise be lighter. I do feel that the cutout could have been a bit better, however - the bottom still has some unnatural straight lines. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Lots of these notes were issues
Summing up, the exact legitimacy of the bill is still disputed and none of us are sure how close this is to the original. I'm okay with the fine details and prints, but it's the legitimacy of the color that is bothering. Is there any way, like some noticeboard in German Wikipedia or Teahouse or helpdesk who can dig up more about this? The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 May 2024 at 18:05:52 (UTC)
- Reason
- Recently featured unanimously on Commons, used in the article's infobox.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Trillium undulatum, Algonquin Provincial Park
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
- Creator
- The Cosmonaut
- Support as nominator – The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – A good nomination, but there's a decent amount of loss of focus on the petal borders (maybe some stacking can help) and the lighting is a bit off. Also, another angle with less leaves would increase the EV significantly. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 May 2024 at 02:59:52 (UTC)
- Reason
- An excellent quality scan (a part of Google Art Project), with good EV.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Jean Baptiste de Champaigne and Nicolas de Plattemontagne (latter added recently)
- FP category for this image
- Paintings
- Creator
- Jean Baptiste de Champaigne and Nicolas de Plattemontagne
- Support as nominator – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 05:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment – Wouldn't it be more appropriate for de Champaigne's portrait to be cropped so that it is the first image? ―Howard • 🌽33 09:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- I mean in the Jean Baptiste de Champaigne article specifically. ―Howard • 🌽33 09:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand. You want to crop the file or make an alt/derived file? The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I mean that the double portrait should be cropped in the Jean Baptiste de Champaigne article so that only de Champaigne's portrait can be seen. ―Howard • 🌽33 20:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Such an extensive crop will drop the EV of the painting significantly and criterion #8 will come into play then, IMO. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't really educate people if there are two people in a portrait and the subject can't be immediately noticed without a caption. ―Howard • 🌽33 20:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support: I updated the article so both a crop and the nominated pic appear. ―Howard • 🌽33 10:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't really educate people if there are two people in a portrait and the subject can't be immediately noticed without a caption. ―Howard • 🌽33 20:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Such an extensive crop will drop the EV of the painting significantly and criterion #8 will come into play then, IMO. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- I mean that the double portrait should be cropped in the Jean Baptiste de Champaigne article so that only de Champaigne's portrait can be seen. ―Howard • 🌽33 20:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand. You want to crop the file or make an alt/derived file? The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 22:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:Jean Baptiste de Champaigne and Nicolas de Plattemontagne - Double Portrait of both Artists - Google Art Project.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 03:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 May 2024 at 00:33:09 (UTC)
- Reason
- Close up view of the Litli-Hrútur eruption in Iceland in 2023. The wow factor does it for me. It’s a good addition to three articles listed below. It can also be added to the Fagradalsfjall article if there is consensus for it.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Effusive eruption, Lava, Volcano
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Geology
- Creator
- Giles Laurent
- Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 00:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Yes, it's a good video. --Janke | Talk 08:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Giles Laurent (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Yann (talk) 11:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – The Herald (Benison) (talk) 22:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 22:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 06:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 18:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Promoted File:007 Volcano eruption of Litli-Hrútur in Iceland in 2023 Video by Giles Laurent.webm --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 May 2024 at 18:51:20 (UTC)
- Reason
- The official NASA crew photo, 29 April 1970. All three men of the Apollo 13 crew in the highest quality of studio photographs.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Apollo 13
- FP category for this image
- Space, People
- Creator
- NASA (NASA Image and Video Library Image number S70-36485)
(See: https://images.nasa.gov/details-S70-36485)
(Non-cropped version of image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Actual_Apollo_13_Prime_Crew_-_GPN-2000-001167.jpg)
- Support as nominator – Indefatigable2 talk 18:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – Govt. promotional photo that tells nothing about highly perilous Apollo 13 mission. Faces of subjects constitute relatively small proportion of image. – Sca (talk) 12:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Sca. These men weren't known for wearing suits, so the EV is modest here. Commons has several photos of the Apollo 13 crew wearing spacesuits (including one posing while doing so with their rocket) that have stronger EV, though the resolution looks lowish - presumably higher res versions are available. Nick-D (talk) 23:34, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Not Promoted --The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)