Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates
📽️ Media
|
Featured picture candidates 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. Old candidates for featured pictures are listed in the log pages and in the candidate archives. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal thingsNominatingGuidelines for nominatorsPlease read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsThere 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:
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." PhotographsOn the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audioPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, PDFs, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominationsIf 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:
Adding a new nominationIf 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 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:
Nominations are time-sensitive and for one-time use only. An automatic clock starts as soon as they are created. Do not create them in advance, save them for later or re-activate them. 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: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using
An 'Alternative' is created by adding a sub-section to the nomination page: ====Alternative==== VotingEditors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 100 constructive, stable edits on Commons (excluding user and talk pages) can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
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:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidatesOver 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:
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:
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:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. 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 policyGeneral rules
Featuring and delisting rulesA candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
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 (“alternatives”) of the image as well as delist-and-replace 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. Hint: Until summer 2025, the bot was also not able to process FPXed, FPDed and withdrawn nominations as well as delist nominations; this has been fixed, users do not need to close such nominations anymore. Above all, be politePlease 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. See also
| |||||||||||||||||||
Table of contents
Featured picture candidates
Gassed - John Singer Sargent
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 23:37:33 (UTC)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page
-
The painting in 2012, before restoration
-
The painting in 2023, after restoration
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Others#Historical
Info (Changing from a Delist and Replace to a Set Nomination per discussion here)
Images of the 1919 painting Gassed by John Singer Sargent before and after a major restoration in 2023. The restoration removed several layers of yellowed varnish, revealing the original colors and drastically changing art historians' interpretations of the work. The first image is from 2012 and is already a featured picture. The post-restoration image was captured by the museum over the course of a week using specialized high-resolution photography.(article about the restoration) (info and video about the restoration from the museum) created by Surajr7 – uploaded by Surajr7 – nominated by Surajr7 -- Surajr7 (talk) 23:37, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Surajr7 (talk) 23:37, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Per the previous discussion, I think this set is a wonderful way to present these images and illustrate this artwork. Cmao20 (talk) 23:58, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 20:28:12 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
Info The Back Side of Santa Catalina Island; Cottonwood Beach, Little Harbor Beach and Catalina Head in the distance: By WPPilot -- Don (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Don (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Wow! Cmao20 (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 21:04:22 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Clavariaceae (Coral Fungus)
Info Mucronella flava in Oregon. Focus stacking of 18 images. Сreated by Casey Helton – uploaded/nominated by me Юрий Д.К. 21:04, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 21:04, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support At full size this is amazing Cmao20 (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 20:06:11 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Tachyglossidae_(Echidnas)
Info Wild Short-beaked echidna in eucalyptus forest; Canberra, Australia -- all by Krigore (talk) 20:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Krigore (talk) 20:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cute, a rare species, and sharp. Image quality is fine, it's obvious to me that it's a phone camera but it is IMO adequate. Cmao20 (talk) 23:59, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 18:43:53 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
Info created by and uploaded by Clément Bardot – nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- IamMM (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 18:36:08 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Ice
Info created and uploaded by BogTar201213 – nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 18:36, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- IamMM (talk) 18:36, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Nice texture, but what am I actually looking at? I don't think 'Ice structure' is anywhere near sufficient for a caption. Ice structure in what and where? There is not even any information about what country the photograph was taken in, let alone anything more specific than that. Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment I agree, and will reserve my vote for after some information is provided. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:32, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Request Since BogTar201213 has been around recently, I hope we can get the needed explanations for the file without having to deactivate the nomination. --IamMM (talk) 20:48, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 16:34:22 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Greece
Info created by Mustang Joe – uploaded by Юрий Д.К. – nominated by ★ -- ★ 16:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- ★ 16:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, this looked great in thumbnail and I was preparing to support, but at full size it is not very sharp, there are some even blurrier transitions between poorly stitched frames, and I'm not convinced the horizon is straight - it looks like the picture is sloping downwards towards the right. Cmao20 (talk) 18:22, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Neutral Thank you, Arion, for nomination of my upload. But I agree with Cmao20. Probably hard denoising from ISO 10000 resulted in loss of detail. Very sad because I very like the composition. Юрий Д.К. 21:30, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 13:02:58 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Carduoideae
Info created by Petro Stelte – uploaded by Petro Stelte – nominated by -- Petro Stelte (talk) 13:02, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Petro Stelte (talk) 13:02, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Original flower, very geometric and detailed. A reframe would probably make it more valuable.--JackyM59 (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I find this picture relaxing Cmao20 (talk) 18:20, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2026 at 04:28:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Netherlands
Info Monumental head-Neck-Body Farmhouse (Tjepma state) Overijsselsestraatweg 22, Reduzum.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:28, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:28, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Nice framing and color scheme --JackyM59 (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 15:23, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Striking presentation of this building Cmao20 (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 21:13:08 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Stairs
Info Here is a risky nomination I can't resist to, due to my fascination for the creations of Antonio Gaudi. I have included two pictures of the stairway of Casa Milá because I found it difficult to make justice to its beauty with a single one. Yes, I do love what the French call Art Nouveau and the Spanish Modernism. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support It is a beautiful building notwithstanding several technical flaws of the photographs (such as blown highlights, lack of sharpness, etc -- but you are no doubt already aware). The official regulations prohibit bringing a "professional camera" so probably we can't do much better than the Fujifilm X-T5 (although I am also disappointed in the X-T5, I thought it would be a lot better, but I checked your EXIF data and found your settings to be optimal for the situation). Overall, the harmonious textures and smooth curves are very nice. However, the regulations also mention that photography "requires special authorisation" and that the "Organization reserves the right to take legal action for the publication of any graphic, audiovisual or digital material of La Pedrera without prior authorization", which seems rather at odds with a free license for Commons. Would that be a problem? But I suppose Gaudi died 100 years ago and the copyright has expired so the architecture itself is public domain. dllu (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment. The nomination should probably be withdrawn and, I assume, the images deleted. "No photos, video and/or sound recordings may be made or broadcast from the Basilica for commercial, advertising or dissemination (my emphasis) purposes without written authorisation in advance from the Foundation" Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:23, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- The rules you cite probably apply to the Sagrada Familia basilica, not Casa Milá. The norms concerning Casa Milá are much more ambiguous. By the way, there are hundreds of photos of this building in Commons.-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:49, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- I think these are the rules of Fundació Catalunya La Pedrera which runs the place. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:42, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Contrast is to high, composition is not interesting, colors neither. Despite you could out 2 original into set nomination. --Mile (talk) 17:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I think the atmosphere of the photos, and the presentation as a diptych, is artistic and elegant. I hope the pictures do not have to be deleted. I won't comment on that, as it is out of scope for what I'm judging here. Cmao20 (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 20:16:17 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Scorpaenidae_(Scorpionfish)
Info Small red scorpionfish (Scorpaena notata), Catania, Sicily, Italy. It's a venomous scorpionfish, widespread in the Eastern Atlantic from the Bay of Biscay to Senegal, Madeira, Azores and the Canary Islands, including the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. The small red scorpionfish has usually a maximum length of about 15 cm (6 in) as adult and it's a littoral species but also occurs in deeper water down to a depth of about 700 m (2,297 ft). The type locality of this species is actually Sicily, where the picture was taken. Note: there are no FPs on Commons of the widespread genus Scorpaena, that includes 65 species. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:16, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support High-quality image showing a vibrant fish laying on what I assume to be coral or a similar creature. The composition is clean and the crop works. Wolverine X-eye 12:36, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Another slam dunk FP Cmao20 (talk) 18:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comment, I wasn't that sure either at the beginning. To me it deserves the star because I've taken tons of photos of scorpionfishes but none like this where I managed a nice POV, a decent quality (it's a small shy fish, they swim away if you get close) and a good separation between subject and environment. Poco a poco (talk) 19:43, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 19:23:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Roads#Tunisia
Info created by Skander zarrad – uploaded by Skander zarrad – nominated by Skander zarrad -- ~~
Support -- Skander zarrad (talk) 19:23, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Iplossusvulpes19 (talk) 01:46, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment A nice photo, which would probably succeed with a better framing: more foreground and less sky. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I like the big sky, I'm not sure I'd support if there were more foreground Cmao20 (talk) 18:16, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 19:00:09 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Ukraine
Info Vorontsov Lighthouse in the Black Sea port of Odesa, Ukraine. Created by Oleksandr Malyon – uploaded by Oleksandr Malyon – nominated by Nurtenge -- Nurtenge (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose interesting, but blown highlights and IMO not sharp enough for FP given that the motif is not that outstanding, sorry Cmao20 (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose as per cmao20, also the sharpness isn't great besides the very center, and the sky is grainy. There's a slightly noticeable amount of chroma noise on the tower itself in the shadow region. However, I do understand that it is difficult to get a shot of this Ukrainian landmark due to the war situation (and access to the port seems pretty tightly controlled otherwise too). dllu (talk) 18:22, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 15:48:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Coenagrionidae (Narrow-winged Damselflies)
Info Coromandel Marsh Dart Ceriagrion coromandelianum (female) with its pray in mouth. It is a medium sized pale green damselfly with yellow tail. Thorax is olive green above merging to yellow on sides, underside is white. Legs are yellow with black spines. Common along the banks of ponds, rivers and canals. Also found frequently far away from water bodies. Breeds in shallow water bodies with profuse growth of grass and other aquatic plants. Flies throughout the year and distributed throughout the Oriental region. Taken at Burdwan, West Bengal, India. --Joydeep (Talk) 15:48, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 15:49, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Question Not sure why you are nominating this female when your existing FP is sharper. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment I'm not sure I feel strongly enough on this one to vote either way. It's sharp and good quality with a nice composition, but quite small for FP. However, I think if you have other FPs of the same species as Charles notes, it would probably be the right thing to do to inform us of them when making the nomination. That's definitely relevant information for voters. Cmao20 (talk) 18:15, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 14:15:26 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Computer-generated#Mathematics
Info Fragment of the Mandelbrot set, using perturbation theory. Frame width: 1.52 x 10⁻⁶². Rendered at 80,000 × 80,000 pixels and downsampled using 8×8 Super-Sampling Anti-Aliasing (SSAA) to a 100-megapixel final image. C++ source code included. Most importantly, beyond its technical milestones, the image showcases a striking aesthetic beauty. Created, uploaded and nominated by Aokoroko -- Aokoroko (talk) 14:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Aokoroko (talk) 14:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment The Mandelbrot set is an endless source of beauty and all we have to do is to choose among thousands of different images generated automatically (or by AI). This is not a critique just a realization that disturbs me a little. Could we compare this situation with the choice we make among the many different views nature has to offer? I feel it is not really the same thing and feel tempted to reject most of these images until something extraordinary comes up. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:40, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- No! Automatically generated (or artificially intelligent) is impossible! Only a HUMAN can do this! And yes, it's extraordinary, but it takes many hours and even days. Aokoroko (talk) 22:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Red fan, standing and running
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 09:55:36 (UTC)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page
-
Standing
-
Running
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info created – uploaded – nominated -- Berthold Werner (talk) 09:55, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 09:55, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Joydeep (Talk) 18:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Okay, that's nice. --Petro Stelte (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Excellent set and a beautiful object in a retro 50s/60s way Cmao20 (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Good idea.--Ermell (talk) 20:35, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 08:30:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#India
Info Landscape at Glenmorgan, The Nilgiris: mix of natural (forested and grassy mountains) and artificial (reservoir, tea plantations). Created by Tagooty – uploaded by Tagooty – nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 08:30, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 08:30, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 17:59, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Not sure of the composition, with hidden bodies of water. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- agree with Basile, perhaps a different angle would work better. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 05:17, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose per Basile — Julian Lupyan (talk) 12:20, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, I agree with Basile. Good image quality but the interesting and beautiful parts of the image are obscured by all the foliage. Cmao20 (talk) 18:13, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 04:36:59 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United States
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support The usually unforgiving midday light becomes a strength, lending the white church an almost graphic presence against the blue sky. Technically flawless and beautifully composed. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:42, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Excellent composition Cmao20 (talk) 14:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 18:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 13:38, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment composition if fine but timing not so much, you could more interesting tones and texture. --Mile (talk) 17:22, 25 June 2026 (UTC) p.S. Try C-PL
Support Is the huge file size necessary?--Ermell (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 04:36:31 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Trentino-Alto Adige
Info IMO beautiful light and composition. No FPs from here. created by Ximonic – uploaded by Ximonic – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:38, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Lovely colours and lighting --Tagooty (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Granada (talk) 08:35, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Lovely! Wolverine X-eye 08:56, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Beautiful layering from the emerald lake to the rugged peaks, with excellent clarity and a strong sense of depth. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 18:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support big Wow factor --Wilfredor (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose, there are visible CAs in the snow, and several clusters of artefacts in the top right sky; very vibrant colour of the lake and composition is nice though most of the mountain is in shadow; overall would support if the CA and especially the artefacts could be removed. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 05:03, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry, I can't see any sign of CA at all. Cmao20 (talk) 10:55, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment I can zoom in to 200% and scroll around in the top right corner but I cannot see any of the claimed artifacts. Also I can't make out any of the claimed chromatic aberrations in the mountains. Granada (talk) 12:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Indeed. I have noticed this forum growing rather paranoid about CA lately. In the past I've nominated pictures that do have slight chromatic aberrations but are extremely high resolution and otherwise good quality, and they have passed without opposition; lately I've seen opposes for CA that is so minor that I genuinely cannot see any evidence of it whatever. Perhaps standards are changing...I'd appreciate a note to show where this has been noticed. Cmao20 (talk) 12:29, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for nomination! I'm a bit confused about the CA and artefact claims as well. I can't see anything drastic myself. I've definitely had worse examples of CA in some of my other pictures, and tbh I don't personally feel too bothered about a little bit of CA. I think it's quite natural thing, that I sometimes fix a bit if I feel like it.
The artefacts, I can't seem to find them on my screen. Surely they can't be that bad, because... uh?The other thing I can address a bit: Yeah, I honestly have a habit of downscaling, and it's purely my preference how I like to view my images when at 100%. I don't want to downscale much, but that's how I like to look at them. (I'm not so interested in evaluating how perfect the lenses are at every situation, or how well camera bodies translate the lens qualities into pixel clusters of varying quality at different corners of image at the full size. Instead, at 100% I like the eye to wander in the details of the landscape itself at that particular resolution, at the level of detail where everything worthy is still there identifiable, if that makes sense.) In short, I just want them to have just the appropriate amount of detail to be "perfect" for Wikipedia articles. The second reason is, i'm still a bit paranoid about where all my pictures might end up, so to ease my anxiety, I still like to have the original files and image sizes in my personal storage as a proof of original ownership. Greetings, --Ximonic (talk) 18:45, 25 June 2026 (UTC)- Found some artefact patches and removed them. Looked like different level of pixel noise. They were very faint atleast for me - I had to really look closely to find them. --Ximonic (talk) 19:01, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for dropping in to make improvements and talk about your photo, Ximonic. You are most welcome for the nomination. I can see the artefacts now that I compare the before and after, but agree that they were very faint indeed! Cmao20 (talk) 19:11, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Found some artefact patches and removed them. Looked like different level of pixel noise. They were very faint atleast for me - I had to really look closely to find them. --Ximonic (talk) 19:01, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for nomination! I'm a bit confused about the CA and artefact claims as well. I can't see anything drastic myself. I've definitely had worse examples of CA in some of my other pictures, and tbh I don't personally feel too bothered about a little bit of CA. I think it's quite natural thing, that I sometimes fix a bit if I feel like it.
- Indeed. I have noticed this forum growing rather paranoid about CA lately. In the past I've nominated pictures that do have slight chromatic aberrations but are extremely high resolution and otherwise good quality, and they have passed without opposition; lately I've seen opposes for CA that is so minor that I genuinely cannot see any evidence of it whatever. Perhaps standards are changing...I'd appreciate a note to show where this has been noticed. Cmao20 (talk) 12:29, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Stunning view and likely a POTY finalist or even winner. There is a very slight CA but only visible at very high zoom, so it is negligible. But I've noticed that original was 6,720х4,480px. Is the photo is cropped or downscaled? Юрий Д.К. 13:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you, agree. I have to go to 300% zoom to see anything that looks like colour fringing! Most of Ximonic's pictures seem to be cropped pretty extensively, often from larger panoramas. Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 13:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:42, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2026 at 04:06:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Groups
Info created by Thomas Eakins – uploaded by LosPajaros – nominated by LosPajaros -- LosPajaros (talk) 04:06, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- LosPajaros (talk) 04:06, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2026 at 22:45:49 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Sweden
Info IMO fascinating architecture, very high quality and resolution. created by ArildV – uploaded by ArildV – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 22:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 22:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support What beautiful detailed image thanks to a Medium Format --Wilfredor (talk) 23:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Interesting! The preview looks unsharp like hell, but in reality this is really sharp and beautiful. --Granada (talk) 08:38, 24 June 2026 (UTC)--Mile (talk) 09:59, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose there are mistakes while joining photos. Its hard not to have them, manual work necessary. Anoted, horizontal lines.
- Okay, I can see two stitching errors - however, they are so small that in a 120 megapixel panorama I personally think they are not important, so I'm not going to withdraw. Cmao20 (talk) 10:53, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Count 4 ongoing. But i expected such comment. When you find broken line go vertical, if Pano is matrix stitch go both (ver-hor). But that big one in the middle should be solved. --Mile (talk) 11:54, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- I could not find the mistakes Llez (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment In addition to the stitching errors, there are also a couple of dust spots which I've annotated. Other than that, the capture is great. dllu (talk) 20:41, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Thank you all for comments, votes and nomination. New version uploaded! Please note that some buildings are not straight in reality here (old houses built on questionable foundations), and that there is a slight unevenness on the facade in reality due to structural settlement. I uploaded one of the ´source files for reference and added some images notes.--ArildV (talk) 06:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment There is one more area where I suspect a stitching error of a horizontal line, see my annotation. But maybe that's really how it looks, please check. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Please see the source file. I added a note there. ArildV (talk) 07:41, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you ArildV, and pinging Mile who was the one who raised this issue. Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 13:33, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support obviously done. Compo work. --Mile (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support lgtm dllu (talk) 18:04, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:01, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2026 at 22:16:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info SANAA-Building at Zeche Zollverein in morning sunlight, architects: Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa
Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:09, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Looks distorted because the viewpoint is too close to the building --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:35, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose As above. Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:01, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Alvesgaspar and Uoaei1: As I've explained in previous nominations with similiar photos, nothing here is distorted or over-corrected. This was shot with a high quality PC-E 19mm tilt-shift lens precisely to render the verticals correctly and avoid the converging-lines distortion a tilted camera would produce. The perspective you see is the geometrically accurate one.
My goal was a high-quality architectural shot in beautiful light that puts the building clearly at its center. The SANAA building stands in a very urban setting, so a more distant viewpoint would inevitably pull in distracting elements such as street lamps, the road, trees and residential buildings. The close corner perspective was a deliberate choice to keep the focus on the architecture. It also nicely emphasises the cirrocumulus clouds, which add to the morning atmosphere.
I'm always a little surprised that slightly bolder perspectives keep meeting resistance - a dynamic viewpoint shouldn't be mistaken for a distorted one. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:34, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment There is no such thing as a "geometrically accurate perspective". Yes, those lines are vertical but we see them as converging when we look up at the building. If we look straight ahead at a close distance, we often won't be able to see it all. Please understand these negative opinions as an expression of an aesthetical feeling, not as a technical evaluation. In other words as a way of saying "this doesn't look natural". Anyway, many people here are aware of my depp deslike of the present fashion of correcting all verticals. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- I fully respect your standpoint. As always with photos - often a matter of personal taste. Nonetheless: I have not corrected the verticals but only put the camera into horizontal position and shifted the image circle. For those who prefer a less dynamic viewpoint I have these shots File:SANAA-Gebäude-Morgenlicht-2026-03.jpg and File:SANAA-Gebäude-Morgenlicht-2026-02.jpg but finally I deciced to nominate this one here. Tuxyso (talk) 18:37, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- To be honest I can understand Alvesgaspar's comments. When using a super wide shift lens, e.g. with a Laowa 15mm f/4.5 Shift, I generally prefer to just take a flat frontal view like File:Hallidie Building in San Francisco dllu.jpg rather than a really dynamic corner view for that reason. Here, I also prefer the relatively "boring" view of File:SANAA-Gebäude-Morgenlicht-2026-02.jpg. As a personal rule of thumb (just for my own taste rather than as a general recommendation), when I do take photos of corner views of cuboid-shaped buildings, I try to prevent the corner from approaching an acute angle less than 90 degrees, although I sometimes do break this rule myself, e.g. in File:Hillman Library, exterior (brighter).jpg. Sometimes I also leave the verticals slightly uncorrected on purpose, e.g. File:Jackson Tower, Portland at dusk.jpg. As an extremely minor nitpick, in the 2026-02 image, there's a very slight bit of chromatic aberrations and barrel distortion, which are generally super annoying to correct with shift lenses. Some newer, super expensive shift lenses, like the Fujifilm GF 30mm f/5.6 TS, will save the shift amount in the metadata, so that software can correct for these. P.S. the legendary Nikkor 19mm f/4 PC-E has long been one of my dream lenses. It is wonderful to see people contributing to Commons with such high end gear. dllu (talk) 20:29, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your detailed background information, I really appreciate it. Due to your hint I have corrected CA on 02 (the correction in LR was just deactivated). The PC-E 19mm is a stunning lens - had a chance to get it used. It is not yet available new. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:43, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- To be honest I can understand Alvesgaspar's comments. When using a super wide shift lens, e.g. with a Laowa 15mm f/4.5 Shift, I generally prefer to just take a flat frontal view like File:Hallidie Building in San Francisco dllu.jpg rather than a really dynamic corner view for that reason. Here, I also prefer the relatively "boring" view of File:SANAA-Gebäude-Morgenlicht-2026-02.jpg. As a personal rule of thumb (just for my own taste rather than as a general recommendation), when I do take photos of corner views of cuboid-shaped buildings, I try to prevent the corner from approaching an acute angle less than 90 degrees, although I sometimes do break this rule myself, e.g. in File:Hillman Library, exterior (brighter).jpg. Sometimes I also leave the verticals slightly uncorrected on purpose, e.g. File:Jackson Tower, Portland at dusk.jpg. As an extremely minor nitpick, in the 2026-02 image, there's a very slight bit of chromatic aberrations and barrel distortion, which are generally super annoying to correct with shift lenses. Some newer, super expensive shift lenses, like the Fujifilm GF 30mm f/5.6 TS, will save the shift amount in the metadata, so that software can correct for these. P.S. the legendary Nikkor 19mm f/4 PC-E has long been one of my dream lenses. It is wonderful to see people contributing to Commons with such high end gear. dllu (talk) 20:29, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- I fully respect your standpoint. As always with photos - often a matter of personal taste. Nonetheless: I have not corrected the verticals but only put the camera into horizontal position and shifted the image circle. For those who prefer a less dynamic viewpoint I have these shots File:SANAA-Gebäude-Morgenlicht-2026-03.jpg and File:SANAA-Gebäude-Morgenlicht-2026-02.jpg but finally I deciced to nominate this one here. Tuxyso (talk) 18:37, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support Юрий Д.К. 12:59, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose I agree, the distortion is probably what is exceptional here, something you manage getting close to the object, not a FP to me, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on Thu, 02 Jul 2026 15:21:45 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport
Info My own work. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:12, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Such a street scene should be with an identified location to be featured IMO. Not necessarily coords, though would be nice too. --A.Savin 07:57, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- And also, "animal transport" is not quite correct
unless you call depicted people animals, "animal-powered transport" would match better. --A.Savin 08:01, 24 June 2026 (UTC)- I didn't mean to imply that the people were animals; rather, I was referring to the type of conveyance involving the animal, the cart, and the seated people. I think it is important to show these kinds of things, which are very common in vast impoverished areas of Brazil.. Thanks for the sugestion Wilfredor (talk) 18:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- And also, "animal transport" is not quite correct
Comment Agree with naming, since its hard to see the animal. --Mile (talk) 10:05, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose No clear composition, no animal clearly visible --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC)- I like the composition. But I find the sharpness subpar for a digital camera. Yann (talk) 19:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2026 at 14:27:01 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#North Macedonia
Info I wasn't sure about the proper category because the barley fields are an essential part of the composition. All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I really like this, it didn't look much in thumbnail but at full size I think it's great Cmao20 (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:34, 24 June 2026 (UTC)Excellent image quality. But I dislike the composition, with a narrow sky and a large foreground, as well as the shadows. Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose
- @Alvesgaspar: Thank you for your review. I was hesitant whether more sky would be beneficial because the cloudless blue sky is not that interesting as the sunlit barley fields in the foreground, but you’re right that the sky in the upper part should at least balance the foreground in the lower part. I've uploaded a version where the vertical length of the sky equals that of the foreground. How does it look now? --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- It is better now, thanks. I'm stil undecided on what to do. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:54, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 13:32, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:03, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2026 at 08:59:42 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Primates#Genus : Macaca (Macaques)
Info We do have current FPs, but I hope the depth of field from focus-stacking the pair makes it sufficiently different. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support. · · · 🌸 Rachmat04 · 🍵 14:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Question: what's going on with the eye of the macaque on the left?.. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Curious about this too. Looks like an unintentional focus stacking error. Perhaps monkey was looking around quickly between the frames. If so, it should be straightforward to fix with a manual mask. dllu (talk) 18:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Done Well spotted; he moved his eyes between frames. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Curious about this too. Looks like an unintentional focus stacking error. Perhaps monkey was looking around quickly between the frames. If so, it should be straightforward to fix with a manual mask. dllu (talk) 18:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:24, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 20:24, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:12, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:34, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 18:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support monke dllu (talk) 21:29, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2026 at 06:46:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Elephantidae_(Elephants)
Info All by -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support —Bruce1eetalk 07:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Simply majestic. Wow! Wolverine X-eye 14:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:12, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose We have thousands of images of elephants on Commons. I don't see why this one should be considerered expectional. Quality is fine, not outstanding, the pose interesting, the human road rather a minus. Sorry, not a FP to me. Poco a poco (talk) 07:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:33, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Agree with opposer. And I don't like the washed-out colors. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:06, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose per Poco a poco & Alvesgaspar. --Joydeep (Talk) 18:05, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose Sorry, have to agree. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 05:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Agreed that this photo isn't outstanding compared to existing FPs of elephants. Still, a technically decent image though. dllu (talk) 18:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2026 at 03:47:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family_:_Polyporaceae
Info Fungus growing on a silver oak (Grevillea robusta) stump, exuding many guttation drops. Width: ~6 cm, height: ~7 cm. Ooty, Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu, India. Focus stack of 21 images. From an image search, I believe this belongs to the family Polyporaceae; I am open to better classification from experts. Created by Tagooty – uploaded by Tagooty – nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 03:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 03:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:09, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:33, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 18:01, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support The drops are gorgeous. Technically the white areas would benefit from having the highlights toned down -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Basile Morin: Thanks for the review. I have already reduced highlights of the upper surfaces by -30 in LR to bring out detail. As the lighting is from above, I felt that further reduction gives an unnatural look. --Tagooty (talk) 03:30, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
- I understand. Although now the appearance seems like a burnt sky, with blown highlights. Not better. About the concern of "natural looking", I always keep in mind that the eyes perceive far more nuances than a camera. In such a situation, with extreme variations, a fair approach is to adjust locally the intensity, in my opinion. Just my 2 cents -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:01, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:05, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 23:58:54 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Japan
Info created by dllu – uploaded by dllu – nominated by Dllu -- dllu (talk) 23:58, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- dllu (talk) 23:58, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support The mix of styles, eras --JackyM59 (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:08, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Good image quality, no magic. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:07, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 21:59:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera/Hesperiidae#Genus : Telicota
Info No FPs of this genus. All by Charlesjsharp – -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Excellent detail, striking composition. --Tagooty (talk) 03:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 04:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Aowlad Alom (talk) 10:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support. · · · 🌸 Rachmat04 · 🍵 14:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Thanks for not apply denoise --Wilfredor (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment The eye looks overprocessed to me, it doesn't loook spherical Poco a poco (talk) 07:17, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- Eye is as RAW files. Spherical. 'Shape' on eye is natural from sunlight. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Joydeep (Talk) 18:01, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Not pefect but close to our best butterfly pictures. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Compelling light with vivid colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 21:44:05 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Order_:_Anseriformes_(Waterfowl)
Info created by Skander zarrad – uploaded by Skander zarrad – nominated by Skander zarrad -- Skander zarrad (talk) 21:44, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Skander zarrad (talk) 21:46, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Good action shot, showing the water flowing off the duck's back as it takes off. --Tagooty (talk) 03:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment It is not taking off. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:28, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Aha! Drying its wings perhaps? --Tagooty (talk) 08:40, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- There are quite a few reasons for this common behaviour. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- Another one walked by and started doing this Skander zarrad (talk) 14:08, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- Aha! Drying its wings perhaps? --Tagooty (talk) 08:40, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support. · · · 🌸 Rachmat04 · 🍵 14:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:05, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Excellent shot, mitigating the blurred wings. Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Visible
chromatic aberration -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 21:09:51 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Stairs
Info created by dllu – uploaded by dllu – nominated by Dllu -- dllu (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- dllu (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Dull colors, not mitigated by the interesting composition. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:49, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Architect Tadao Ando is known for his minimalist concrete architecture focusing on shapes and light rather than colors. dllu (talk) 23:39, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Tadao Ando's buildings do not indulge in color, they are composed with form and texture. This is classic Andao, color would be inappropriate. Acroterion (talk) 05:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 05:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Nice shot and frame --JackyM59 (talk) 12:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment This photo is "wasted" in color. I would put monochrome. It is just calling for it. --Mile (talk) 17:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- I was thinking the same thing, that straight-up monochrome would have more impact. Acroterion (talk) 22:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 19:12:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Cycling
Info Samuel Fernandez Garcia (team Caja Rural-Seguros RGA) at the finish of Stage 5, 2026 Tour of Slovenia in Novo mesto. -- Mile (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Mile (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I hope to see more sports pictures, especially from this year's World Cup, nominated for Featured Pictures.--Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 20:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 07:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --JackyM59 (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:43, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Well done --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 14:53:16 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Others
Info created by JackyM59 – uploaded by JackyM59 – nominated by JackyM59 -- JackyM59 (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- JackyM59 (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- JulfikarIndia (talk) 16:03, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:26, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Quality is good and colors are vey nice. But composition seems chaotic to me. Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:50, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Thanks for this great review. This is exactly what I was looking to show: a spring field bouquet looking for a little space among the monoculture fields… -- JackyM59 (talk) 09:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support: lovely scene for me. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- This is what flower-rich wild edges generally look like. That is the charm of uncomplicated flower meadows.Famberhorst (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 20:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Excellent way of capturing what spring flowers actually look like Cmao20 (talk) 22:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:01, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Per Alvesgaspar Poco a poco (talk) 07:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Overall this imge works but could be a little more impactful if the distracting poppy in the top right was cropped out. That would leave the rest of the red poppies appear like a diagonal dappling of sunlight across a meadow... --GRDN711 (talk) 18:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support The top-right poppy mentioned by GRDN711 is a minor distraction, but it doesn't reduce the image's appeal for me. The wonderfully natural abundance of flowers is exactly what makes this composition so convincing. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Thanks for the tips, I had made a second cliché more square this one. I kept this one more open with the barley field blurred in the background and especially not to cut the oat stalk on the left. -- JackyM59 (talk) 06:45, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Baia dei Conigli
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 13:15:02 (UTC)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page
-
East view
-
West view
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Sicily
Info: Conigli Bay, Lampedusa; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:15, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:15, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Question I don't really understand the sets, so I'll ask why not a full panorama instead? I imagine the bay was very large?. Thanks for answer --Wilfredor (talk) 14:23, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- It is, in fact, quite long, it's not a small cove, but that's not the issue. It's certainly possible to make a panorama from one of these viewpoints, but it's not possible to merge the views from the two opposite points into one, hence the set. The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- thanks for explain Wilfredor (talk) 21:01, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- It is, in fact, quite long, it's not a small cove, but that's not the issue. It's certainly possible to make a panorama from one of these viewpoints, but it's not possible to merge the views from the two opposite points into one, hence the set. The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:26, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment It would look nicer with the horizons aligned. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support up to charles sugestion --Wilfredor (talk) 21:02, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose I don't think this montage works. One of the reasons is that the individual images are not vey good per se. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:53, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Done: made it more symmetrical. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:24, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 20:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)I would support the right image by itself but the composition of the left image does not rise to FP level to me, although the image quality is good. Cmao20 (talk) 22:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose
Support I was too harsh on this. I still think the west view is much better though. Cmao20 (talk) 18:24, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:17, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose I concur with Cmao20 Poco a poco (talk) 07:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Agree that one image would be better than the set. --Tagooty (talk) 08:43, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 10:59:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1900-1909
Info created by Dhaka Nawab Familly – originally uploaded by Aditya Kabir, Current version uploaded by Tausheef Hassan – nominated by Tausheef Hassan -- Tausheef Hassan Auntu ✉Talk? 10:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tausheef Hassan Auntu ✉Talk? 10:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Black border at right looks bad. This is fixable, but too small for FP. Yann (talk) 11:42, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Below 2Mpx --Ezarateesteban 12:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose low size --Wilfredor (talk) 18:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 10:33:02 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Portugal#Faro
Info: Tonel Beach a few minutes before sunset; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 10:33, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 10:33, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:07, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:27, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Nice light. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Superb gradient of yellow orange --JackyM59 (talk) 08:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Lovely light Cmao20 (talk) 22:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:17, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:59, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Now we are talking Poco a poco (talk) 07:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Lovely warm light --Tagooty (talk) 08:44, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:29, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 19:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support as per Jacky and Poco. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:08, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2026 at 06:56:01 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Turdidae_(Thrushes)
Info All by -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:56, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:56, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:19, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:37, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- JulfikarIndia (talk) 16:01, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 17:28, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Granada (talk) 18:44, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --JackyM59 (talk) 18:50, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Love blackbirds, i put them water in this heat. They like showering too, in the morning and before bed time. ISO could be 1600. --Mile (talk) 19:19, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 20:28, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:22, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Caught the moment. Slower shutter speed and lower ISO would give better quality. --Tagooty (talk) 08:46, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Good captures! --Basile Morin (talk) 01:11, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2026 at 22:35:46 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Diogenidae_(Left-handed_Hermit_Crabs)
Info created by Smailtn – uploaded by Smailtn – nominated by Ovva olfa -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 22:35, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 22:35, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 03:37, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support
Oppose As far as sharpness goes, that's not FP standard to me. Sorry.--Ermell (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Was this meant to be an oppose vote Ermell? Cmao20 (talk) 22:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Corrected. Sorry.--Ermell (talk) 21:11, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --JackyM59 (talk) 08:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support Quite small but still good for me Cmao20 (talk) 22:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Not the quality I'd expect of a macro shot. The animal is not very fast, you can get very close, ideal conditions for the shot. Sorry, not a FP to me Poco a poco (talk) 07:22, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2026 at 21:07:19 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Cephalopoda
Info Common cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis), Catania, Sicily, Italy. The common cuttlefish is one of the largest and best-known cuttlefish species. They are a migratory species that spend the summer and spring inshore for spawning and then move to depths of 100 to 200m during autumn and winter. They only have a lifespan of 1–2 years and have many predators including sharks, dolphins, seals, fish, and cephalopods which includes other cuttlefish. During the day, most cuttlefish can be found buried below the substrate and fairly inactive. At night however, they are actively searching for prey and can ambush them from under the substrate. Cuttlefish are carnivorous and eat a variety of organisms including crustaceans (crabs and shrimp), small fish, molluscs (clams and snails), and sometimes other cuttlefish. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 21:22, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Looks yummy. Grand-Duc (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment: please check the categories and the file name. This is not a fish, nor was this shot in Catania. Administrative borders follow the shoreline. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 22:18, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
- The Cosmonaut: The first feedback is fixed, thank you. I'm not sure about your second feedback. The cities are usually responsible for the administration of the waters in front of the city, how could be that otherwise? Indepednently of that I cannot find any name of the water in front of the coast that is not named after Catania. Do you have a concrete proposal? Poco a poco (talk) 06:15, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- My understanding is that the maritime areas are generally managed by the Sicilian region, no the adjacent municipalities. Maybe it is better to categorize according to the protected area?.. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 10:30, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- The name of the protected area is "Biviere di Lentini, tratto mediano e foce del Fiume Simeto e area antistante la foce". I could add this as a cat. Poco a poco (talk) 07:09, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 03:38, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 11:40, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support did you set time correct ? --Mile (talk) 19:24, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:43, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --JackyM59 (talk) 08:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Quality and composition Cmao20 (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Outstanding detail and sharpness for an underwater image. Striking colours. --Tagooty (talk) 08:48, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2026 at 20:05:23 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Tunisia
Info created by Smailtn – uploaded by Smailtn – nominated by Ovva olfa -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 20:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 20:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Please add geolocalitation template. Also a category not exist. BTW Amazing brutalist reflection photo, a Big wow factor --Wilfredor (talk) 00:32, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Wilfredor, thank you, all fixed SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:49, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 03:38, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:57, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose I understand the idea, but the result is not pleasant to my eyes. Two reasons: the dull colors of the structure and the ugly foreground. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:45, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Alvesgaspar, thank you for you interest, The special feature in this photo is the bridge's unusual shape, with its steep incline on the left; this incline allows the bridge to withstand and support the thousands of cars and heavy trucks that cross it daily. The location is a canal that connects the southern lake to the sea and is also used by the power plant for cooling the reactors. I also slightly increased the contrast and clarity in the new version. SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support SAIDI Ismail (talk) 08:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Unusual and striking view Cmao20 (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2026 at 06:46:55 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/United States
Info created by Timothy Holdiness – uploaded by Timothy Holdiness – nominated by Timothy Holdiness -- Ktkvtsh (talk) 06:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Ktkvtsh (talk) 06:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 03:38, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Just smartphone image quality and not the best light --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:54, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Agree, and composition is not that interesting. Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:54, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose Sorry, nice view that reminds me of the old Win XP wallpaper but typical smartphone image quality holds it back from FP Cmao20 (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2026 at 12:26:38 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Ireland
Info created – uploaded – nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 12:26, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 12:26, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:54, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment The colorful and partially cut off pipes on the right are mildly distracting whereas the left edge is cropped very tightly near the door. dllu (talk) 00:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I like it. --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2026 at 10:12:52 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Books and Paper
Info created by Madreiling – uploaded by Wakobear – nominated by Wakobear -- Wakobear (talk) 10:12, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Wakobear (talk) 10:12, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment You should create a JPEG version, and nominate it instead. Yann (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support No issue with TIF in my opinion Cmao20 (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2026 at 08:52:39 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#India
Info created and uploaded by Amitabha Gupta – nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 08:52, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 08:52, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Nice light, but it seems that there is CW tilt. Yann (talk) 09:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose Interesting view but IMO flat light and the orange object in the water is distracting, although you probably couldn't help that Cmao20 (talk) 22:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2026 at 23:06:57 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures indoors
Info created and uploaded by Juansebastianvg – nominated by ★ -- ★ 23:06, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- ★ 23:06, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 22:09, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Harsh distracting shadow in bottom right; poor categorisation; caption does not adequately detail what we're looking at. Cmao20 (talk) 22:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2026 at 09:57:39 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Lower Saxony
Info Climate change and bark beetles: A few years ago, the bench was still standing in the forest; created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:57, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:57, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --JackyM59 (talk) 19:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support That's very sad. --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:25, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:51, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Very important documentation. I also cover forests in my surroundings, and I am astonished how fast and spreading this disaster is --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 11:57, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2026 at 23:45:24 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Others
Info Ventilation towers of Casa Milà, Barcelona, designed by the Catalan architect Antonio Gaudi to look like warriors. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:45, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:45, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 06:48, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:41, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support High quality and striking motif Cmao20 (talk) 14:36, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:56, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --El Golli Mohamed 14:27, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Excellent perspective, makes the four ventilation towers look like four abstract(ish) sculptures of heads. – Took the liberty to tweak the gallery link: IMHO this one fits best into our ‘Architectural elements’ gallery. – Aristeas (talk) 18:44, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 10:38, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but I don't understand what this image depicts Юрий Д.К. 22:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Once again, it is a real privilege to have an oppose vote from Юрий Д.К., who has cast 99 other votes in the present month of June, all of them "support". I didn't care to check the other months of the year, but suppose the result is no different. In the end, this is a good thing, because the image will stay more days in the page and will probably attract other positive opinions. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:56, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- I've already answered on your talk page. Юрий Д.К. 17:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- Once again, it is a real privilege to have an oppose vote from Юрий Д.К., who has cast 99 other votes in the present month of June, all of them "support". I didn't care to check the other months of the year, but suppose the result is no different. In the end, this is a good thing, because the image will stay more days in the page and will probably attract other positive opinions. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:56, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I'd call it art Poco a poco (talk) 07:25, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support as per Aristeas and Poco. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support In this case, light and shadows combine with the structure of the design -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2026 at 21:21:17 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Russia
Info Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia. My photo. --Юрий Д.К. 21:21, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Юрий Д.К. 21:21, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Iplossusvulpes19 (talk) 22:37, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Neutral Good picture, but I would have waited a few seconds until the woman entered the building. --Llez (talk) 09:40, 20 June 2026 (UTC)- @Llez: Thank for feedback. Even on a Monday, it is very difficult to take pictures of buildings in Moscow without distracting people and cars. As for this building, I waited about 10 minutes to get a good shot, but I couldn't. I decided to take several photos of small parts of the building and combine them into a panorama. Sometimes this is the only way to get a good photo of a building or a street in Moscow, which is heavily overpopulated. Юрий Д.К. 12:22, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment I would be tempted to crop out the road. The curved road markings give the impression that the picture is slightly distorted, and there is just nothing interesting to see there anyway. Cmao20 (talk) 14:38, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment: agree with the above; in fact, I would also crop out the very unsightly bollards. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:18, 20 June 2026 (UTC)- @Cmao20 and The Cosmonaut: Hi,
Done Юрий Д.К. 15:25, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support FP now Cmao20 (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Missing geolocation and depicts (P180) statement --Wilfredor (talk) 18:12, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Done, coords here, but I don't know what is "(P180) statement" means Юрий Д.К. 18:34, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- You will find it on Structure data on the image description Wilfredor (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Done I hope that I didn't wrong something, as I not fully understand what Structured data works. Юрий Д.К. 14:31, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
- You will find it on Structure data on the image description Wilfredor (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:51, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --El Golli Mohamed 14:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Good quality, no magic. Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:49, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Per Alvesgaspar, the fence is disturbing and on top it was cropped Poco a poco (talk) 07:25, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Per Alvesgaspar. The building is actually not nice at all (don't ask why). --A.Savin 08:05, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2026 at 14:49:33 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Species : Vulpes vulpes (Red Foxes)
Info Red fox cub at the British Wildlife Centre. Created by Flickr user Peter Trimming – uploaded by Meisam – nominated by LetmeEditit -- LetmeEditit (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- LetmeEditit (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Info Unfortunately low resolution but I love everything else about this picture LetmeEditit (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 15:21, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support Very small, but I do think it's a special moment. However, it needs a descriptive rather than emotive title - that needs to be changed before promotion. Cmao20 (talk) 20:09, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose size. Did they calculate to pass those 2,05 Mpx. --Mile (talk) 20:17, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
- Doubtful - created by a Flickr user who surely had no expectation his picture would end up here. Cmao20 (talk) 20:21, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support Per Cmao20, very specific photo. I've renamed the file. Юрий Д.К. 20:34, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support: per Cmao20. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:42, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support I like the composition; it manages to tell a story, but the image size is very small, although we can't demand large sizes from authors outside of Commons. --Wilfredor (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose This is a well-composed and attractive image, but unfortunately the resolution is too low to meet Featured Picture standards. --Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
- The current image is 1,720 × 1,260 pixels (2.2 MP). I agree that it is quite small and that this could justify an Oppose vote; however, it does meet the Featured Picture requirements. Wilfredor (talk) 18:16, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Given the low resolution, the quality is not good enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Nice photo but the resolution is too low. TheBritinator (talk) 11:26, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Agree Poco a poco (talk) 09:44, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2026 at 09:44:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#North Macedonia
Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:44, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:44, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 15:21, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support - You can feel the texture of the stone in this picture just by looking at it. How old is the home? --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:57, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
- This architectural style was popular from the late 18th to the early 20th centuries, so this particular house was probably built within that time frame. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:25, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --JackyM59 (talk) 18:40, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:59, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but this distortion is too agressive to me. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Neutral Good quality but personally I am not sure this is outstanding enough for FP in composition, subject, or light Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Nice. Юрий Д.К. 20:41, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support The building is documented well and the composition is decent, but the image feels more descriptive than exceptional.--Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 22:29, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support stari zgradi merak se. OK compo, boji. --Mile (talk) 03:48, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:56, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 09:56, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:30, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2026 at 09:35:21 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Ukraine
Info Church of the Intercession in Mykhailivka, Krasnopilka Municipality, Vinnytsia Oblast, Ukraine. Created by Yurii-mr – uploaded by Yurii-mr – nominated by Nurtenge -- Nurtenge (talk) 09:35, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 09:35, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:45, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment There are more mistakes around, is tower leaning that much to left ? WB might be questionable, sharpness on edges could be beter, and I cant read much from EXIF to judge, old cam, new, lens. But composition work. --Mile (talk) 10:42, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose for now. My instinct is that this picture has FP potential but that at the moment it needs a perspective correction, it is oversaturated, and the white balance is too cool. Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Needs PC and I would make the image slightly brighter. Birch tree on the left is blurred. Also the photo has dust spots and strange magenta artefacts in the sky. Regarding the camera, likely Sony ILCE-7RM2/3 has been used. Юрий Д.К. 20:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose As it is. --Mile (talk) 07:50, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2026 at 15:24:16 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Coenagrionidae (Narrow-winged Damselflies)
Info created by, uploaded, nominated by -- Joydeep (Talk) 15:24, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Joydeep (Talk) 15:24, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support. · · · 🌸 Rachmat04 · 🍵 18:22, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Question Is there a particular reason for this nomination? This is not a good example of the red form - see images in the English Wikipedia article. You already have a very similar FP (also described as red form) of a similar form of female of this species which I much prefer to this one. The size was fine for 2012. You have many other nice damselflies you could nominate. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:00, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry but I agree with Charles, this is quite small and the definition/quality is not that high for this size. The picture is QI but not one of your best in my opinion. Cmao20 (talk) 22:06, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 05:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but quality and composition are not good enough. Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2026 at 00:51:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Uzbekistan
Info View of the Ugam-Chatkal State Biosphere Reserve, Tashkent Region, Uzbekistan. All by -- Iplossusvulpes19 (talk) 00:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Iplossusvulpes19 (talk) 00:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:31, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 10:38, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 11:13, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:06, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --IamMM (talk) 18:05, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Nice composition Cmao20 (talk) 22:03, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:03, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:51, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 22:51, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:46, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 10:08, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Of the two images you have nominated for FP with the same subject, IMO, the other one is better. The foreground is distracting on this one. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:30, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback! However, I didn't know that nominating two images of the same subject would lead to an opposition against one of them. Iplossusvulpes19 (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2026 at 20:21:41 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Jewellery_and_objects_of_precious_metals
Info Architectural reliquary for the skull relic of Saint Anastasius of Persia, fashioned as a miniature of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem; partially gilded silver with niello on domes and door surround, Antioch, Byzantium, 969/970; Aachen Cathedral Treasury, photographic technique: hand-held, focus stack
Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment A bit more work needed on the masking, especially bottom left. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:05, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- There was natural window light from the left (unusual for a museum) thus the bright slightly blueish edge is a result from the light situation in the museum, not an editing error. I have a tendency to keep that „edge light“ - what do you think? Tuxyso (talk) 22:14, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- Might it work better if you blur the join line between mask and subject? Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:38, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Done. Please take another look, Charlesjsharp -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:14, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- Looks a lot better, thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:43, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- Might it work better if you blur the join line between mask and subject? Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:38, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- There was natural window light from the left (unusual for a museum) thus the bright slightly blueish edge is a result from the light situation in the museum, not an editing error. I have a tendency to keep that „edge light“ - what do you think? Tuxyso (talk) 22:14, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:02, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:04, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 21:02, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 10:09, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:01, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 18:23, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 04:33, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2026 at 16:57:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Tunisia
Info created by Majbri wael – uploaded by Majbri wael – nominated by TOUMOU -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 16:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 16:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose I see nothing exceptional here --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:26, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 05:48, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak support I imagine a rural worker leaving very early for work, taking advantage of taking his wife to the city center, then one finds this incredible panorama of lake and mountains. Maybe the lower left side is too tight, but it seems like a good composition to me. --Wilfredor (talk) 13:39, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Interesting composition LetmeEditit (talk) 18:01, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:05, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support I was on the fence, but Wilfredor convinced me Cmao20 (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 21:02, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Support — Julian Lupyan (talk) 08:36, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Composition, light, and depth of field. The motorbike, seen from behind, is too close to the corner. The dull light, bland colors and unexceptional sky are quite boring, in my view. Moreover, the foreground is really blurry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:28, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose per Basile Morin. I also don't see anything special here. --imehling (talk) 16:18, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Poor framing. Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 07:27, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Tomer T (talk) 08:38, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 12:56:08 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus : Butorides
Info My own work. --Wilfredor (talk) 12:56, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:56, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Even though it is on a man-made jetty, I think your existing FP of this species is much better. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:57, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks dear Charles for your comment, I appreciate the criticism. In the old FP version, which is not the current one, the whole animal is not in focus, and there is also a lack of depth of field. I believe the image works better now, showing the animal in its natural environment. Also, the older version had some Photoshop editing that I now consider excessive Wilfredor (talk) 16:44, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Lovely reflection, I like your other FP but I think both can be featured Cmao20 (talk) 18:31, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 22:01, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Nurtenge (talk) 03:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Interesting pose & great reflection too. --~2026-35539-45 (talk) 03:54, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- This was me - for some reason I got logged out and didn't realize. Not sure if I can edit that or not. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 03:56, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 07:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 07:46, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment Looks underexposed to me Poco a poco (talk) 09:11, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- One of the things I liked most was the natural light. The camera has enough dynamic range to change the night or afternoon into a beautiful day, but that would alter the reality of the moment.Thanks for your review Wilfredor (talk) 10:49, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- I agree that it is underexposed (on my calibrated monitor). Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:21, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- The file uses the full tonal range with almost no clipping, so the darker look is a deliberate low-key rendering of dappled shade, not under-exposure and the still, dark water is what lets the reflection read. The bird is fully exposed and detailed. Happy to upload a slightly lifted version so you can compare. Thanks both Wilfredor (talk) 16:35, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- I agree that it is underexposed (on my calibrated monitor). Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:21, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- One of the things I liked most was the natural light. The camera has enough dynamic range to change the night or afternoon into a beautiful day, but that would alter the reality of the moment.Thanks for your review Wilfredor (talk) 10:49, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:03, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 12:43, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 16:08, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Categorize properly, please. What kind of "Reflexes" are depicted? May it be you mean "Reflections"? Really so difficult to look before setting a nomination? --A.Savin 18:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, I fixed it. The correction was fair, but comments phrased like “Really so difficult to look before setting a nomination?” are exactly the kind of thing that makes me feel less motivated to participate at FPC Wilfredor (talk) 21:47, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- Why? (Refers to "comments phrased..." etc) --A.Savin 09:57, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: Are reflection categories now sufficiently dealt with? Rhetorical question of course... --A.Savin 09:57, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- Because it goes beyond a categorization issue and comes across as a personal reproach. Since this is coming from an administrator, I would have expected a bit more consideration in the wording. I was absent from FPC for about a year precisely because this kind of interaction was causing me a lot of stress. I recently returned with the intention of participating constructively, so I would appreciate comments being phrased in a way that focuses on the issue, not on the person. I have no problem with corrections; in fact, I corrected the issue after your comment. The correction was fair, and as I already said, I fixed it, “Please review the reflection categories before nominating” would have been enough. Also, oppose votes are generally used for issues that make the image unsuitable or that cannot be easily fixed, such as problems with the image. Even in those cases, many users write something like “I will change my vote if this is fixed.” A category issue can be fixed quickly, and I often correct such issues myself in other FPC nominations rather than opposing because of them. If there is still something specific missing, please let me know. Wilfredor (talk) 14:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- @A.Savin: would you consider removing your oppose? Seems odd to prevent an image from speedy promotion over a concern that had already been addressed. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 22:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, I fixed it. The correction was fair, but comments phrased like “Really so difficult to look before setting a nomination?” are exactly the kind of thing that makes me feel less motivated to participate at FPC Wilfredor (talk) 21:47, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:31, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:43, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support ★ Sàádî (talk) 10:32, 18 June 2026 (UTC) ★
Support --Ermell (talk) 10:59, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 11:20, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support --IamMM (talk) 18:09, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 21:06, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Sun 21 Jun → Fri 26 Jun Mon 22 Jun → Sat 27 Jun Tue 23 Jun → Sun 28 Jun Wed 24 Jun → Mon 29 Jun Thu 25 Jun → Tue 30 Jun Fri 26 Jun → Wed 01 Jul
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Wed 17 Jun → Fri 26 Jun Thu 18 Jun → Sat 27 Jun Fri 19 Jun → Sun 28 Jun Sat 20 Jun → Mon 29 Jun Sun 21 Jun → Tue 30 Jun Mon 22 Jun → Wed 01 Jul Tue 23 Jun → Thu 02 Jul Wed 24 Jun → Fri 03 Jul Thu 25 Jun → Sat 04 Jul Fri 26 Jun → Sun 05 Jul
Closing nominations manually
The following description explains how to close nominations manually. Normally this is not necessary, as FPCBot takes care of counting the votes, closing and archiving the nominations. When the Bot has counted the votes, a user needs to check and approve the result; everything else is done by the Bot. Therefore, the following instructions are normally only needed for delist-and-replace nominations that the Bot cannot (yet) process, and in case the Bot malfunctions. The closing can be done by any experienced user. If you need help, just ask on the FPC talk page.
Closing a featured picture nomination
- On Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the nomination, then [edit].
- Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line):
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=(“yes” or “no”)|gallery=xxx|sig=~~~~}}
(You can leave thegalleryparameter blank if the image was not featured. If the nomination contains alternatives, you must add thealternative=xxxparameter with the name of the selected image between thegalleryand thesigparameter. See {{FPC-results-reviewed}} for examples and more explanations.) - Edit the title of the nomination and add
featuredornot featuredafter the link – for example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured === - Save your edit.
- Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line):
- 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.
- Add the picture to the appropriate featured picture gallery page and section. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images on Commons:Featured pictures, list to find the gallery page, and search for the correct section. (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-nomparameter. For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted in the nominationCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use{{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}You also need thecom-nomparameter if the image gets renamed. - If the image is already featured on another Wikipedia, just add
featured=1to the {{Assessments}} template. For instance,{{Assessments|enwiki=1}}becomes{{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
- If it was an alternative image or part of a set nomination, use the
- Head over to the structured data for the image and add the “Commons quality assessment” claim (P6731) “Wikimedia Commons featured picture” (Q63348049).
- Add the picture to the chronological archives of featured pictures. Place it at the end of the gallery using this format:
File:xxxxx.jpg|# '''Title'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]<br> {{s|xxx}}, {{o|xxx}}, {{n|xxx}}- The
#should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other entries on that page for examples. (If you want to do everything perfectly, link that number to the nomination subpage, just like FPCBot does this. It allows users to jump directly to the nomination.) - The
Titleshould be replaced by the bare name of the featured picture, without the ‘File:’ or the file extension (such as .jpg .tif .svg). - The
xin{{s|x}}, {{o|x}}, {{n|x}}should be replaced by the count of support, oppose, and neutral votes respectively. - If the nomination was a set nomination, use this format:
File:xxxxx.jpg|# '''Set: Title (Z files)'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]<br> {{s|x}}, {{o|x}}, {{n|x}}
Replace theZin(Z files)by the count of images in the set, and use the name of the first image from the set instead ofFile:xxxxx.jpgand for the title.
- The
- Add
== FP promotion ==
{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}}to the talk page of the nominator. For set nominations, use:== Set Promoted to FP ==, using the names of the set files instead of the XXXXXX and the title of the set instead of YYYYY.
<gallery>
File:XXXXXX.jpg
File:XXXXXX.jpg
</gallery>
{{FPpromotionSet2|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.
- Add candidate archive categories to the nomination so that people can easily find and evaluate past nominations (this applies also to unsuccessful, {{FPX}}-d, {{FPD}}-d and {{Withdraw}}-n nominations). It’s best practice to wrap all these categories in a
<noinclude>...</noinclude>section because they apply only to the nomination itself, not to the log page etc. which transclude it. You need three or four categories:- A category for the month and year, like Category:June 2026 featured picture candidates for the current month.
- A category for the type and result of the nomination, like Category:2026 successful candidates for featured picture status; replace “successful” by “unsuccessful”, “FPXed”, “FPDed” or “withdrawn”, depending on the final result of the nomination (see the supercategory for common values).
- A category for the subject of the nomination, like Category:2026 featured picture candidates of plants. Replace “plants” by one of the possible subject keywords like “animals”, “architecture”, etc.; see the base category for all common keywords. Basically the subject keywords correspond to the first part of the gallery link.
- If the nomination is a set nomination, add Category:2026 featured picture set nominations.
- As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}-d, {{FPD}}-d and {{Withdraw}}-n nominations), you have to move the transclusion (the {{ }} and the text within those) of the nomination to the current log page.
- To find the current log page, visit the first page of the log for this month. If the header of that page contains a link with the text “Next part of this month”, the log for this month has been split into several parts because it contains too many entries. Click on the “Next part …” link and repeat this until you reach a page where the header does not offer a “Next part …” link; that’s the last and current log page.
- Now open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you are closing. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}or:{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/XXXXX}}. - Copy that line to the bottom of the current log page and save that page. Then remove the same line from the candidate list and save that page.
Closing a delisting nomination
- On Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line):{{FPC-delist-results-reviewed|delist=x|keep=x|neutral=x|delisted=yes/no|sig=~~~~}}
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/File:Ensifera ensifera (22271195865).jpg) - Edit the title of the delisting nomination and add
delistedornot delistedafter the image title; for example:=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted === - Add candidate archive categories to the nomination; this works the same way as described above for featured picture nominations. The only difference is that the category for type and status must be of the form Category:2026 successful candidates for delisting from featured picture status, or Category:2026 successful candidates for delisting and replacing featured pictures if this is a delist-and-replace nomination. Substitute “unsuccessful”, “FPXed”, “FPDed” or “withdrawn” for “successful”, depending on the final result of the nomination.
- Move the transclusion of the nomination to the current log page; please see above for an explanation how to find the current log page and how to move the nomination to it.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- In the {{Assessments}} template on the image description page, change
featured=1tofeatured=2(do not remove the {{Assessments}} template; 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 with{{Assessments|featured=2}}. - Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris); but not from categories about featured pictures on specific Wikipedia editions, like Category:Featured pictures on Wikipedia, English.
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" (Q63348049) from the picture's Structured data.
- In the {{Assessments}} template on the image description page, change
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in the chronological archive 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 archives.
- 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 section above. 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.
Archiving a withdrawn nomination
If a nomination has been withdrawn by the nominator by using {{Withdraw}} or is cancelled with {{FPX}} or {{FPD}}, wait 24 hours after the nomination was last edited. If there has been no objection to the cancellation within this time, the nomination can simply be archived. Just add candidate archive categories to the nomination itself, then move the transclusion of the nomination to the current log page; please see above for an explanation how to find the current log page and how to move the nomination to it.
