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-thirds 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-thirds 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).
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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 the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.
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.
Of excellent technical quality and provides an exemplary head-shot of the subject bird. Featured, quality, and valued on Commons. Primary head-shot in article.
A crucial piece is missing but the rest is still enough for FP. King's speech does not become PD until 2038, which is notable in and of itself and adds to the educational value of this video.
Comment – A sublime moment in U.S. history. But the 'redaction' of King's famous speech is rather off-putting, IMO. – Sca (talk) 14:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It feels pretty hard to win here - I have received significant opposition to images because the background was too blurry in recent months. :) JJ Harrison (talk) 01:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Partial closure: I judge this to have succeeded in its nomination, but I'm afraid that my recent computer troubles mean I don't have access to the full closure tools.Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs00:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Feb 2020 at 02:18:28 (UTC)
Original – James Thompson's plat of Chicago. Finished on August 4, 1830, this constitutes the first official recognition of a place known as "Chicago", which would later incorporate as a town in 1833 and as a city in 1837. According to the Chicago History Museum, this is the original copy of the plat; this is item ICHi-034284 in the Museum's collection, with restoration done to remove subsequent additions.
Reason
Historically significant as the first plat of Chicago and thereby possessing EV. I withdrew the original nomination slightly more than two weeks ago over concerns of its timing and to work on the image by restoring it to remove non-contemporaneous subsequent additions. I have since learned from the Chicago History Museum that this is indeed the original plat. I have also included an altAlt 1 - brighter version over concerns of definition in the original nomination, unless I have misunderstood those concerns.
Oppose – Fails criterion # 3 - this hardly "is among Wikipedia's best work"... However, it is useful and of good EV in the articles. --Janke | Talk16:16, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It may just be me or my monitor, but I think I slightly prefer the brighter, browner coloration of the unrestored File:Sojourner Truth, NPG.79.220.jpg to the restored version, which seems a little dull to me and makes the folds of the shawl almost disappear. TSP (talk) 12:51, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can redo this without changing the levels if others agree with TSP but I thought the highlights were overblown in the original, especially on her face and on the shawl. On my monitor the shawl is more visible in the restoration. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 14:13, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the black background and flashed lighting is acceptable here - a cursory google suggests that this snake is nocturnal and the photo also seems to suggest this. P.S. It can be much easier to locate this sort of thing at night - probably it was found with eye shine and a headtorch or similar. JJ Harrison (talk) 04:38, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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 users
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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}}.
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:
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.
Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the January archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:
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.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
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}}.
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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
Support high-quality image of a station that is notable architecturally, not just for its place in transportation. The bare light bulbs are blown out but what can you do about that? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Feb 2020 at 11:52:21 (UTC)
Original – Magnification of frontal portion of a polychaete worm from the Belgian continental shelf. Coloured with eosine to facilitate sorting and identification.
Reason
Clear, informative image of this bristle worm, already a featured image on Commons
Oppose - Only partly shown, and not in natural condition (stained with eosine color). Besides, smaller than accepted minimum for FPC. --Janke | Talk13:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean about the size, but the original file is 1,200 × 900 pixels. The worm is only partly shown because there may be 300 or more body segments; it is equivalent to a human portrait showing a head and shoulders. Staining is a normal microscopic technique. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:29, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I know all that. Still, I would like to see a photo showing the natural state. Also, to elucidate re. size: The FPC criteria (link also on top of this page) state, among other requirements: "Still images should be a minimum of 1500 pixels in width and height-" --Janke | Talk20:41, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, based on size. If dying and a focus on the head are important for ID purposes, I'm not going to oppose on those grounds. I'd be open to an argument that the small size is forgivable given the small subject, but I think this falls below the bar expected for this sort of image; compare it to File:Lagis koreni (with and without tube).jpg and File:Nototropis falcatus.jpg, for example. However, it's a really striking image that we're lucky to have. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:00, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2020 at 19:24:11 (UTC)
Original – Diamond Firetail (Stagonopleura guttata), Glen Alice, Lithgow, New South Wales, AustraliaOriginal – Diamond Firetail (Stagonopleura guttata), Glen Alice, Lithgow, New South Wales, Australia
Reason
Nominating as a set - the two images combined create greater EV than either individually and the lighting and so on is similar
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2020 at 11:54:02 (UTC)
Original – Tromp-l'oeil of a goldfinch created by Carel Fabritius in 1654 shortly before he was tragically blown to bits. Lost for many years, it was recently brought to wider attention by being a plot device in Donna Tartt's Pulitzer winner.
Reason
Meets all the criteria and the article on the painting will probably be FA shortly, so it would be nice to make a set. Have a read of the article, it's fascinating stuff.
Support. Good scan of high-EV painting. For a photo this would not be high-res by modern standards but it's good enough in this instance to capture the details of the brushwork, so I don't think it's a problem. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:47, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Melitaea_cinxia_MHNT_CUT_2013_3_27_Avilly-Saint-L%C3%A9onard_dorsal.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Melitaea_cinxia_MHNT_CUT_2013_3_27_Avilly-Saint-L%C3%A9onard_ventral.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Kaeng_Krachan_National_Park_(27493423545).jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
