Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.
This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Scope – In addition to falling within the Commons scope, candidates must be static two-dimensional images. All other types of files should be nominated at Commons:Featured media candidates.
Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents
There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.
Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.
Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.
Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.
Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.
Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."
Photographs
On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good.
Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc.
Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.
If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).
Adding a new nomination
If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate name, quality, image description, categories and licensing, then do the following.
Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.
All single files:
For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2
All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".
Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.
Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports An image will only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.
Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters.
Voting
Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.
You may use the following templates:
{{Support}} (Support),
{{Oppose}} (Oppose),
{{Neutral}} (Neutral),
{{Comment}} (Comment),
{{Info}} (Info),
{{Question}} (Question),
{{Request}} (Request).
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.
A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.
Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
No reason
"I don't like it" and other empty assessments
"You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).
Featured picture delisting candidates
Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case.
This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
Text to use
Displays as
Meaning
{{Keep}}
Keep
It deserves to remain a featured picture.
{{Delist}}
Delist
It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
Text to use
Displays as
Meaning
{{Keep}}
Keep
Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP.
{{Delistandreplace}}
Delist and replace
Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:
In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.
As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.
Featured picture candidate policy
General rules
The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome.
Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome.
Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5):
Pictures are speedy declined if they have fewer than two support votes.
Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.) This does not apply to nominations containing at least one ‘Alternative’ image – because it is possible that another image can overtake the one in the lead during the last days, such nominations are never closed early.
Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.
Featuring and delisting rules
A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
At least seven Support votes (or 7 Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.
Only two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5.
The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules.
Above all, be polite
Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.
Happy judging… and remember… all rules can be broken.
Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.
Featured picture candidates/File:Valley of flowers national park, Uttarakhand, India 03 (edit).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Valley of flowers national park, Uttarakhand, India 03 (edit).jpg
Info The Dzhuguturlyuchat massif and its glaciers in the Dombay-Ulgen Valley, Caucasus Mountains, Karachay-Cherkessia. All by --Argenberg (talk) 12:55, 1 October 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait Nepalese hindu priest in Kathmandu-070A2930.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait Nepalese hindu priest in Kathmandu-070A2930.jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:D-6-78-193-157 St Leonhard, Stettbach. Blick von der Empore.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:D-6-78-193-157 St Leonhard, Stettbach. Blick von der Empore.jpg
Info Only 2.4 megapixels and of poor technical quality (blown highlights at the top of the towers, not that sharp, not central, and perspective handled poorly). Colours look overprocessed and HDR is overdone. Survived a previous delist nomination in 2013 by the skin of its teeth, but clearly is not sufficient for FP today and I'm honestly surprised it ever passed FPC in the first place. Indeed, it appears that so is the photograph's own author, who seems incredulous that it became featured and asked people to kindly stop nominating it for awards. I think the author's wishes should be honoured in this case. I don't make delist nominations often but this one makes the galleries worse by its presence. (Original nomination)
Featured picture candidates/File:Ring-tailed lemur (Lemur catta) in tree.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ring-tailed lemur (Lemur catta) in tree.jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:Shamanic ritual pillars at Cape Burhan, Olkhon Island, Lake Baikal.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Shamanic ritual pillars at Cape Burhan, Olkhon Island, Lake Baikal.jpg
@Poco a poco: I worked on the raw file and uploaded a new version with significantly higher detail. The reason for the low detail was the excessive denoising in the processing phase. I first uploaded a version with very little processing, but brightened and sharpened it a bit following Bojan’s comment below. How does it look now? --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:024 Male green kingfisher in Encontro das Águas State Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:024 Male green kingfisher in Encontro das Águas State Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:Pomegranate flowers (Punica granatum), Ponte de Sor, Portugal (approx. GPS location) julesvernex2.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pomegranate flowers (Punica granatum), Ponte de Sor, Portugal (approx. GPS location) julesvernex2.jpg
Comment Thanks for the nomination, Cmao20! I love these hours spent wandering around orchards in Ponte de Sor (a little inland town from where part of my family is). I only take one lens with me, to force me to look for compositions that work for that particular setup. For this image, I used a 135mm portrait lens. These can't focus very close but are sharp and have a very nice bokeh, making them a good choice for environmental pseudo-macro shots. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 13:47, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome, thanks for dropping by to talk about your photo. I like that this photo includes room to breathe around the flower. It would be tempting to crop closer but I think you'd lose a lot in terms of composition. Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful ‘environmental portrait’ of these exquisite flowers, with balanced composition, good detail on the flower and a nice soft background that makes the flowers stand out. – Aristeas (talk) 15:51, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:15-09-2018 - Panorama du Chateau de Brest.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:15-09-2018 - Panorama du Chateau de Brest.jpg
Support Huge resolution and great subject. However, the panoramic image template should be included on the image page, as I severely doubt that the river actually does curve like this so it is surely a result of the panoramic projection. Cmao20 (talk) 12:41, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice photo. Description says immature and info says female. Can anyone tell the difference? Would add value to Wikipedia article described as immature/female. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:55, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Oops. Female or immature male is indeed what I meant. If there's a good way to tell them apart in the fall, I don't know it (though I'm checking with a few folks -- would be nice to be more concrete if possible). — Rhododendritestalk | 11:39, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but not an outstanding composition to me, although surely a useful photo for the project. Also needs perspective correction. Cmao20 (talk) 02:06, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Lambda picture from mobile phone. Chromatic aberrations, artifacts, perspective issue and poor light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Featured picture candidates/File:Open wing basking upon cemented floor of Bassarona durga (Moore, 1858) - Blue Duke WLB IMG 4446.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Open wing basking upon cemented floor of Bassarona durga (Moore, 1858) - Blue Duke WLB IMG 4446.jpg
Support. If the elevation of the ground and drone are both correct, the DJI is quite high up! (I live within walking distance of an Air Force base, and they would probably throw a fit if I took a drone above tree level). JayCubby (talk) 17:38, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Hauptdeckenfresko-Heilig-Geist-Kirche-Muenchen-2025.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hauptdeckenfresko-Heilig-Geist-Kirche-Muenchen-2025.jpg
Info Main ceiling fresco of the central nave of the Heilig-Geist-Kirche in Munich, Germany. Artist: Cosmas Damian Asam, reconstructed by Karl Manninger. Motif: Foundation of the Holy Spirit Hospital with Munich Brezenreiter
Weak support The image is technically well done, but I find the cropped feet a little distracting. Otherwise, the imagery conveys a beautiful emotional, even intimate mood. There is a dark spot in the top left of the image that I would remove. How did you create the streaky bokeh? --Syntaxys (talk) 03:28, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sorry but although it's a nice behaviour shot and may be a good QI or even VI, the sharpness is not that high, the background is not attractive, and the feet are cropped. Overall a good image but not FP for me Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Heavily downscaled. This is 5.42 Megapixel (1,901 × 2,853 pixels), while the camera can do 24.5 Megapixel (6,048 × 4,024 pixels). Yann (talk) 19:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I agree that it is cropped not downsized, there is no bad practice here as far as I can see. But I think the contrast has been turned up too high and the composition just doesn't appeal to me when I see some of the concert photos we have promoted in the past Cmao20 (talk) 12:43, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Silhouette of Sultan Quli Qutub Shah Tomb.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Silhouette of Sultan Quli Qutub Shah Tomb.jpg
Featured picture candidates/Varanus komodoensis, Komodo Island, Indonesia, 20250822 1332 2808.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/Varanus komodoensis, Komodo Island, Indonesia, 20250822 1332 2808.jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:Andean emerald (Uranomitra franciae viridiceps) male Paz de las Aves.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Andean emerald (Uranomitra franciae viridiceps) male Paz de las Aves.jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:VitorJubini DunasdeItaunas ConceicaodaBarra ES (40154690824).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:VitorJubini DunasdeItaunas ConceicaodaBarra ES (40154690824).jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:006 Toco toucan in Encontro das Águas State Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:006 Toco toucan in Encontro das Águas State Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
Support The arrangement directs the view to the twin towers and on to the roofless keep. On closer look one can spot quite a number of 'flaws' e.g. roof damages with potential to keep the lord of the castle busy. Virtual-Pano (talk) 23:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Bayerische-Staatskanzlei-München-vom-Hofgarten-Gewitter-2025.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bayerische-Staatskanzlei-München-vom-Hofgarten-Gewitter-2025.jpg
Oppose While the image quality is excellent and the subject and mood are nice, I'm not sure an off-centre composition was the right choice here, and I don't think the people add to the scene, particularly as they are carrying mobile phones and plastic bottles so they can't really be said to add to the composition. We have two|existing FPs of this subject. Though, rather confusingly, even though the pictures are both by the same author, one is in the Architecture/Exteriors gallery and one is in Architecture/Castles and fortifications. Which I guess links to my concerns here about how inconsistently these pages are actually categorised. Cmao20 (talk) 20:58, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review. Imho the first existing FP has unfavorable light, because the main building is in shadow. The second one is a remarkable different composition. Indepedently what the group of people do have in their hands, all of them are looking or pointing at the main motif and support the overall composition. —Tuxyso (talk) 23:45, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The stylistic technique of decentring is well chosen here to break up boring symmetries and create more vitality in the visual flow. The tourists are a good contemporary document and they're simply omnipresent in Munich. --Syntaxys (talk) 04:03, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Aerial View of Peaks of Khumbu, Ngozumpa Glacier and Gokyo Lakes (crop).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aerial View of Peaks of Khumbu, Ngozumpa Glacier and Gokyo Lakes (crop).jpg
Support It was probably a bit windy for the foliage, and (per Poco a poco) I would have cropped a bit more on the left and added a bit more on the right, but all in all, it's a beautiful portrait of a natural monument in the best light. --Syntaxys (talk) 04:30, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful light and colours. The centered view seems fine to me – it’s interesting enough in this case thanks to the vastly different background at the left and the right. – Aristeas (talk) 15:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Info View of Rechtenbach in the Southern Palatinate with the surrounding vineyards. In the background, across the Rhine valley, you can see the mountains of the Black Forest. In the foreground, on the outskirts of the village, stands the Protestant parish church (formerly St. Mary's). Created, uploaded and nominated by Syntaxys (talk) 06:36, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm still considering it. It's a very beautiful scene and exceptionally clear. The lighting is rather unfavorable for the church and the Black Forest, as they're in shadow. A few hours later might have been better. --Milseburg (talk) 10:10, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your review. I took the photo a few days ago at 3:30 p.m. CEST, when the sun is already a little lower in the sky at this time of year, as you can see from the shadows. Sunset that day was at 7:30 p.m., and because the hills of the Palatinate Forest begin right behind me, the village would probably have been in shadow much earlier. Two hours later, the picture would certainly have been different, but what it would have been like is anyone's guess – it turned out the way it did. According to the simulation by https://www.suncalc.org/, this side of the church is only in sunlight early in the morning at the given date. --Syntaxys (talk) 11:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Apart from the lighting the compo isn't working for me. Too cluttered. The path is always a nice option to make it interesting, but it's too short/cropped, the church is partially obscured and centered. I'd have tried to place the church on the left and show more of that path. Poco a poco (talk) 13:52, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your review, and I am delighted that you were able to find something positive about the image after all. My intention for this photograph was to show this church, a cultural monument of this community, in its idyllic surroundings, framed by vineyards in a spacious landscape. The farm track is not the main subject of this photograph, even though it contributed significantly to the composition and the viewer's gaze. The main focus of the viewer's gaze is determined by the church tower, which is positioned in the golden ratio, where it belongs. I also made other shots of this motif with slight variations in the composition, but I deliberately chose this image because it best represents my intention. --Syntaxys (talk) 04:54, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the chosen viewpoint as it depicts the fact that the church has been founded on higher ground than the village itself thus gives it a more dominant character. Virtual-Pano (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support You've convinced me. North-facing sides are difficult to capture in the right light. Here, it's actually an advantage: The church stands out well from the surroundings. I was initially confused because the Black Forest is so dark, too. But it's also far away and stands out clearly and distinctly. --Milseburg (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had already considered staying a little longer to take advantage of the fantastic light. But train connections in Germany are a matter of luck at the moment, and I wanted to catch the train that was guaranteed to run. On the far right of the picture, before the hills start to slope down, you can even see the antenna on the Hornisgrinde, the highest mountain in the northern Black Forest. I travel a lot here in the Southern Palatinate, and we rarely have such a clear view because of the haze produced by the Rhine. For a sunny north side of the church, the best chances are probably from mid-May to early September, either in the morning until 8:30 a.m. or in the evening from 6:30 p.m. onwards. I will check it!
Info stained-glass window dated ~1400 of a former cistercian monastery in the vivinity of Cologne - The place is now known as Altenberg cathedral or 'Bergischer Dom' ---- all by me Virtual-Pano -- Virtual-Pano (talk) 21:00, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The great merit of this photo is to show not only the stained-glass window, but also its sculptural and architectonic context recognizably and realistically. This is much more difficult than these good old “colorful stained-glass window on black background” pictures which look like cut out. A little bit soft, but I have seen this often in HDR images by our best photographers; and still much better than oversharpening. – Aristeas (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Pez payaso de cola amarilla (Amphiprion clarkii) en una anémona magnífica (Heteractis magnifica), islas Ad Dimaniyat, Omán, 2024-08-16, DD 76.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pez payaso de cola amarilla (Amphiprion clarkii) en una anémona magnífica (Heteractis magnifica), islas Ad Dimaniyat, Omán, 2024-08-16, DD 76.jpg
InfoClark's anemonefish (Amphiprion clarkii) in a magnificent sea anemone (Radianthus magnifica), Ad Dimaniyat Islands, Oman. Note: there are no FPs on Commons of the species Amphiprion clarkii. Clark's anemonefish is a small-sized fish which grows up to 10 centimetres (3.9 in) as a male and 15 centimetres (5.9 in) as a female. It's the most widely distributed anemonefish, being found in tropical waters from the Indian Ocean to the Western Pacific in depths between 1–60 metres (3.3–196.9 ft) with host anemones. Clownfish and sea anemone form together one of the most known symbioticmutualism. The sea anemone protects the clownfish from predators, as well as providing food through the scraps left from the anemone's meals and occasional dead anemone tentacles. In return, the clownfish defends the anemone from its predators, and parasites and are unaffected by the stinging tentacles of the host anemone. In a group of clownfish, there is a strict dominance hierarchy. The largest and most aggressive fish is female and is found at the top. Clownfish are sequential hermaphrodites, meaning that they develop into males first, and when they mature, they become females. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 15:01, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Info The photo shows the old municipal slaughterhouse in a saxony smalltown Crimmitschau. Today, the former slaughterhouse is the only one in Saxony that has been preserved in its original form. More Info: see Image description.
The image is a Streetline panorama and was created from 24 individual photos.
What makes it special is that it is a linear panorama due to the short shooting distance. This cannot be easily created using stitching software, but must be corrected in a complex manual process (further information here)
created by Je-str (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2025 (UTC)| – uploaded by Je-str (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2025 (UTC)| – nominated by Je-str -- Je-str (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
now Neutral thanks for removing nearly all of the horizontal lines, only a small portion remaining (top left of tower) - but there is more e.g. the blurred billboard on the far left side - I won't support this one Virtual-Pano (talk) 12:33, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It's absolutely fantastic that you went to the trouble of showing the overall view of a building, which you wouldn't normally get in this way. However, the compromises in composition regarding the doubling and corrections in the background seem quite significant to me. --Milseburg (talk) 10:17, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this is a really interesting effort and a great subject but I'd like you to check the pavement because it does seem to undulate up and down, I'd like to be sure that's a feature of the original images rather than being caused by improper stitching. Cmao20 (talk) 13:32, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive work. It’s funny that some trees in the background are repeated ;–). IMHO it’s OK because it does not affect the main subject and the montage is clearly declared. – Aristeas (talk) 08:51, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Info An amateur photographer in love with Bologna (Italy) recommended I photograph the crucifix in the Basilica of San Petronio in Bologna at late sunset, when the light from the side windows is tinged with blue. Under these conditions, two different colors, natural and artificial, create an emotional impact, complementing each other and highlighting the beauty of the Renaissance crucifix. Created - uploaded - nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 12:05, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weakSupport while the crucifix is matching FP -- however enhancing details (by applying HDR) of an already slightly cluttered background didn't really help - this is one of those <less would be better> shots, from my point of view. Virtual-Pano (talk) 21:12, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand perfectly what you mean. Based on your helpful opinion, I made some changes on a new version that should have reduced the clustering effect in the background. Terragio67 (talk) 00:02, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The adjustments improved the focus on the crucifix. For me, the bluish tones of the columns add a pleasant contrast and enrich the composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:48, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Poco. I thought its inch drone or smaller. But i expect better IQ for FF. I wonder is it trough the window shot ? --Mile (talk) 15:49, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. Have taken the liberty to rename the image to a less ambiguous name and to update the nomination accordingly.– Aristeas (talk) 15:21, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The "White Sandstone Mountains" in Zakynthos are ancient sea-floor sands, slowly carved by erosion into today’s striking cliffs and pinnacles —kallerna (talk) 06:57, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I would have removed the person, at least because they are the only one in the picture. But please, a question that has nothing to do with the rating: Is that really sandstone? Given the cracked structure caused by drying out, I would have guessed clay, loess, or other sedimentary deposits. --Syntaxys (talk) 07:09, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yeah, you are correct, the grain size of the particles here is less than on the common definition of sand. That is why I put the name of the formations under quotation marks, as it is not technically correct. Same thing with the size of the cliffs, they are rather small to be mountains - that is why I took the photo with the person: it works as a scale. —kallerna (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even though the person is small, they are a good focal point in the picture. They give the photo that certain something. --XRay💬08:18, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The person isn't distracting at all. Quite the opposite: it helps you judge the proportions. She's not portrayed in an unflattering way, either. Overall, a very good picture. --Milseburg (talk) 10:29, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting place, balanced composition, and the person helps the image both as a scale and as an artistic point thanks to the contrasting colours etc. – Aristeas (talk) 09:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Info Arabian butterflyfish (Chaetodon melapterus), Ad Dimaniyat Islands, Oman. This species attains a maximum total length of 13 centimetres (5.1 in). It's found in the north western Indian Ocean where it is found in the Persian Gulf, off the southern coasts Arabian Peninsula from the Gulf of Oman to the Gulf of Aden, and in the southern Red Sea. Note: there are no FPs of this species on Commons. c/u/n by Poco a poco -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me the fallen stone with the erased letters and the fallen leaves have an obvious, very sad, very moving allegorical meaning. An excellent, very tactful, but still moving illustration. Aristeas (talk) 09:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Showing the architecture of the building in this way is a good idea and makes the image unique in its category. It is also beautifully executed. --Syntaxys (talk) 15:07, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Info Winged altar at the Church of the Holy Blood in Pulkau, Lower Austria. Anonymous master (called Master of the Pulkau Altarpiece), around 1515. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:38, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:St Dominic church in Viana do Castelo 05.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Dominic church in Viana do Castelo 05.jpg
Support The Madonna is slightly overexposed, but since the entire altar is the main subject, the new cropping now also benefits the image. --Syntaxys (talk) 03:16, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Agree about overexposure, also in the chair on the right (HDR would have helped here). Level of detail is overall not the best, either. Poco a poco (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Cloister of the abbey in St-Papoul (20).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cloister of the abbey in St-Papoul (20).jpg
Strong support Very beautiful, good light and quality. A really exemplary example of the “cloister seen from corner with symmetrical two-point perspective” idea. – Aristeas (talk) 09:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Победник, Београд (The Victor, Belgrade, Serbia).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Победник, Београд (The Victor, Belgrade, Serbia).jpg
Support Exceptional image. For curious, did you actually make the image on Fuijifilm Velvia using a Hasselblad (6cm x 6cm ?) on your drone, or did you implement the Velvia look in post processing? --GRDN711 (talk) 00:48, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment True. Its done by me in software, but it was not hard to capture Velvia colors, i used it and still do on film camera. Actually Velvia is done for Asian market, they say Asians (perhaps Laitche can say more) see this colors different than Caucausian. It would be hard to climb with 6×6, its some 15-20 m above the ground. What i miss is 2×, 3× zoom, which i might try with tieing smartphone to DJI. Yes, Velvia make more cinematic look. --Mile (talk) 08:28, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Milseburg that there is a slight purple tinge to the oxidized copper (which of course suggests more purple elsewhere), but I don't think overall it is too far in the unnatural direction. The unusual view, including a beautiful use of the rule of thirds, is definitely a plus. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:23, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The image is very well done in many aspects and deserves to be called excellent, but personally, I find the "alienation" somewhat disturbing. The image would certainly also be impressive with natural colours or in b/w. --Syntaxys (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'm glad you kept the current colours. Colour grading has always been a staple of cinema (movies like Vertigo, 2001, and Dune wouldn't be the same without it), it's great to also see it applied to photography --Julesvernex2 (talk) 16:51, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I agree with Cmao about the white specks and Yann about the crop. A more standard 2x3 crop would probably work better. Great lighting makes this a weak support from me, though. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:26, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Isterdalen from above Stigfossen, Rauma, Møre og Romsdal, Norway, 2025 May.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Isterdalen from above Stigfossen, Rauma, Møre og Romsdal, Norway, 2025 May.jpg
Weak oppose Really sorry. Extremely striking for sure but the distortions are just too much for me. An image like this runs a fine line between 'impressive' and 'weird.' Cmao20 (talk) 00:54, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition: Very successful – the road and the river draw the viewer's gaze deep into the image. The waterfall, river, and winding road create movement and excitement. The use of a 14 mm wide-angle lens inevitably results in some distortion, but in a scene like this – a wild, monumental mountain landscape – it is more impressive than distracting. For me, it is a breathtaking image that shows how much humans want to control nature and find their way into it. The focal length perfectly conveys the adventurous and spectacular nature of the scene. --Syntaxys (talk) 03:26, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support: noticeably distorted building are distracting indeed, but their small size and off-centred location don't take away much from the overall wow. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not a fan of these ultra-wide angle perspectives; but I must admit that this result is so stunning and vertiginous that I must support it. – Aristeas (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'll be honest, I think this interesting motif is spoilt by all the road signs. They are just too distracting for me. Image quality and composition is great though. Cmao20 (talk) 00:52, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The signs document the German character very well: if something can be prohibited, then it will definitely be prohibited. What bothers me more about the picture is the lack of depth, which is due to the light on the one hand and the viewpoint and perspective on the other. Perhaps 35 or 28 mm and a few steps forward would have been better for the composition, so that the gate leads the eye to the building. Otherwise, the picture is very well done technically. --Syntaxys (talk) 03:46, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Aerial image of Château de Villandry (view from the southeast).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aerial image of Château de Villandry (view from the southeast).jpg
Weak oppose It's a nice image but there just isn't a wow factor for me – I think the residential area on the left kinda ruins it for me. :( --SHB2000 (talk) 22:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment@Cmao20: Thank you very much for your feedback! I have uploaded a new version. I hope it addresses the point you have made. I'm unsure whether this is important, but this picture was taken from an airplane, not a drone. --Carsten Steger (talk) 05:50, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Low detail, disturbing non horizontal lines, part of the park obscured but the forest, highlights and dark areas can be improved. I think that this subject shouts for a shot from the above (centered) Poco a poco (talk) 14:47, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for your review. I aligned the image so that the parallel structures in the gardens appear horizontal in the image. I was also wondering about the alignment of the uppermost edges of the uppermost three flower beds until I looked at Google maps and realized that they are not rectangular. The ground plan of the entire garden is somewhat irregular. Other lines that appear to be non-norizontal to you may be caused by slopes in the gardes, for example hedges on ramps or staircases. I agree that a minisucle part of the gardens is obscured by the forest — basically a part of the hedge at the southern end of the gardens. The corresponding parts of the garden that are framed by this hedge are depicted almost completely. --Carsten Steger (talk) 16:00, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Your comment about the drone photo piqued my curiosity. The maximum drone flying height in France is 120 m above ground level. The extents of the château's grounds are approximately 400 m × 340 m. This means that the drone's camera would have to have a field of view of approximately 120° × 110° — the equivalent of a 10 mm lens for a 36 mm × 24 mm camera sensor. There are drones that have a camera with a 120° field of view along the horizontal image axis. However, if I assume a 16:9 aspect ratio (or even a 4:3 aspect ratio), the château's grounds would probably be a bit too large to fit into the frame. Even if they would, the perspective distortions of anything that is non-planar, such as any building on the château's grounds or the higher parts on its east and south sides, would be enormous. I'm not sure whether this wouldn't create more visually displeasing effects than it would solve. --Carsten Steger (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent documentation and a really fascinating view for everybody who appreciates classic garden design. Carsten is obviously right that it is impossible to take a perfectly aligned photo because the ground plan of the garden itself is somewhat irregular; and the houses at the left do not distract, it’s not an ugly modern residential area, but a likeable old hamlet. The light is a bit harsh and the white balance a bit cold, but in the end this is a matter of taste. – Aristeas (talk) 18:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:ND-05456 Linde vor der Kapelle 4-2025 (7).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:ND-05456 Linde vor der Kapelle 4-2025 (7).jpg
Featured picture candidates/File:Life preserver on post, Leamington Harbour, Leamington, Ontario, 2025-08-02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Life preserver on post, Leamington Harbour, Leamington, Ontario, 2025-08-02.jpg
Info While I was waiting for a motorcycle rally to begin, I explored the harbour in Leamington, Ontario. I was struck by this life buoy on a wooden post, a simple motif that felt very rustic (especially compared to the decidedly modern ferry I'd just been watching). While the work is minimalist, similar to the road sign further down the page, I think that this fits best in the Other objects category. All by Crisco 1492 -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fri 26 Sep → Wed 01 Oct
Sat 27 Sep → Thu 02 Oct
Sun 28 Sep → Fri 03 Oct
Mon 29 Sep → Sat 04 Oct
Tue 30 Sep → Sun 05 Oct
Wed 01 Oct → Mon 06 Oct
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Mon 22 Sep → Wed 01 Oct
Tue 23 Sep → Thu 02 Oct
Wed 24 Sep → Fri 03 Oct
Thu 25 Sep → Sat 04 Oct
Fri 26 Sep → Sun 05 Oct
Sat 27 Sep → Mon 06 Oct
Sun 28 Sep → Tue 07 Oct
Mon 29 Sep → Wed 08 Oct
Tue 30 Sep → Thu 09 Oct
Wed 01 Oct → Fri 10 Oct
Closing a featured picture promotion request
The bot
Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.
Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag featuredornot featured – for example: === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
Save your edit.
If it is featured:
Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
If it was an alternative image or part of a set nomination, use the com-nom parameter. For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
If the image is already featured on another Wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
Add == FP promotion == {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the talk page of the nominator. For set nominations, use: == Set Promoted to FP == <gallery> File:XXXXXX.jpg File:XXXXXX.jpg </gallery> {{FPpromotionSet2|YYYYY}}, using the names of the set files instead of the XXXXXX and the title of the set instead of YYYYY.
Add == FP promotion == {{FPpromotedUploader|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the talk page of the user who has uploaded the image, if that user is not the same as the nominator.
Add == FP promotion == {{FPpromotedCreator|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the talk page of the creator, if the author is a different Commons user than nominator and uploader.
Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag delisted or not delisted For example: === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
In the {{Assessments}} template on the image description page, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). If the image description page uses the old {{Featured picture}} template, replace it by {{Assessments|featured=2}}.
Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture must not be removed from the chronological list.
If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination
In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit]. In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template: {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}}
Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag not featured For example: === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
Skip to current candidates
.jpg)
Info created by and originally uploaded by Rohit Sharma – edited and nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
Delist -- Cmao20 (talk) 00:47, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
Keep I still find it very good. Do we have similar to replace ? --Mile (talk) 09:39, 1 October 2025 (UTC)_in_tree.jpg)
Done I've uploaded a brighter and slightly sharper version while also protecting the level of detail per Diego's comment above.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 05:55, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
,_Ponte_de_Sor,_Portugal_(approx._GPS_location)_julesvernex2.jpg)
.svg/20px-Pictogram_voting_comment_(orange).svg.png)
Comment Thanks for the nomination, Cmao20! I love these hours spent wandering around orchards in Ponte de Sor (a little inland town from where part of my family is). I only take one lens with me, to force me to look for compositions that work for that particular setup. For this image, I used a 135mm portrait lens. These can't focus very close but are sharp and have a very nice bokeh, making them a good choice for environmental pseudo-macro shots. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 13:47, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
Neutral Overexposed areas, not the most spectacular bird, on the other side I guess we have no FPs of this species Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2025 (UTC).jpg)
_-_Blue_Duke_WLB_IMG_4446.jpg)
Weak oppose Nice subject but the top crop is too tight Poco a poco (talk) 19:15, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
Strong support Exquisite Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Nice but detail is improvable Poco a poco (talk) 19:15, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
Question Where did you get the behaviour explanation from? Could it not be allopreening or, perhaps, scalping? Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2025 (UTC).jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_in_tree.jpg){kind=link}
_in_tree.jpg){kind=link}
,_Ponte_de_Sor,_Portugal_(approx._GPS_location)_julesvernex2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Blue_Duke_WLB_IMG_4446.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_male_Paz_de_las_Aves.jpg){kind=link}
_male_Paz_de_las_Aves.jpg)
_male_Paz_de_las_Aves.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
I withdraw my nomination. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:57, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
Abstain as author -- Syntaxys (talk) 06:36, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
_en_una_anémona_magnífica_(Heteractis_magnifica),_islas_Ad_Dimaniyat,_Omán,_2024-08-16,_DD_76.jpg){kind=link}
_en_una_anémona_magnífica_(Heteractis_magnifica),_islas_Ad_Dimaniyat,_Omán,_2024-08-16,_DD_76.jpg)
_1.jpg){kind=link}
_1.jpg)
_1.jpg){kind=link}
,_islas_Ad_Dimaniyat,_Omán,_2024-08-13,_DD_77.jpg){kind=link}
,_islas_Ad_Dimaniyat,_Omán,_2024-08-13,_DD_77.jpg)
,_Silesia_02.jpg){kind=link}
,_Silesia_02.jpg)
,_Silesia_02.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}