Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.

Promoting an image

If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.

The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.

Delisting an image

A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.

  • Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.


Step 3:
Transclude and link

Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (direct link).

How to comment for Candidate Images

  • Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
  • Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
  • You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

How to comment for Delist Images

  • Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
  • Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
  • Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
  • You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
Please remember to be civil, not to bite the newbies and to comment on the image, not the person.

You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.

Editing candidates

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg

In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.

Highlight test image.svg

Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.

Colortest.png

On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background. Note that the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.

Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
To see recent changes, purge the page cache.
FPCs needing feedback


Georgia Guidestones, Elbert County, GA, US (05).jpg Georgia Guidestones


Sunset Park waterfront (85311p).jpg Sunset Park, Brooklyn

Current nominations[edit]

Thyroid hormone synthesis[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Feb 2023 at 20:40:41 (UTC)

Original – Synthesis of thyroid hormones
Reason
This illustration of thyroid hormone synthesis is used in many articles. It has a detailed caption in the first two articles listed below. The file description is detailed and lists the sources. There is a SVG version but it is only used in one article [1], apparently the article editors prefer the nominated version (used in 7 articles).
Articles in which this image appears
Thyroid hormones, Thyroid, Thyroid follicular cell, Triiodothyronine, Thyroid peroxidase, +2
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Biology
Creator
Mikael Häggström

C/2022 E3 (ZTF)[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Feb 2023 at 17:33:24 (UTC)

OriginalC/2022 E3 (ZTF) on 27 January 2023
Reason
Quality photo of this recently discovered comet, discovered in March 2022. This photo was captured in January 2023 when the comet was close to Earth and had an anti-tail. The photo is published by INAF, the Italian National Institute for Astrophysics. The photo is captured by an independent (I think) photographer who is affiliated with INAF. Was seen on en-WP main-page.
Articles in which this image appears
C/2022 E3 (ZTF), +1
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
Edu INAF, photographer: Alessandro Bianconi

Hohenschwangau Castle[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Feb 2023 at 17:18:05 (UTC)

Original – Hohenschwangau Castle at Schwangau, Bavaria, Germany.
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC in June where it was featured unanimously. Very high resolution (100 MP). Previous nomination ended on 4-0.
Articles in which this image appears
Hohenschwangau Castle
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Thomas Wolf

Filipendula vulgaris[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Feb 2023 at 17:12:39 (UTC)

Original – Dropwort inflorescence
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC two months ago, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears
Filipendula vulgaris
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
Ivar Leidus

Uniform compound of four tetrahedra (UC23)[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Feb 2023 at 06:11:59 (UTC)

Original – Uniform compound of four digonal antiprisms, or tetrahedra UC23
Reason
This uniform compound of four tetrahedra (UC23; p=2, q=1 and n=4) is beautiful, and surprisingly not very well known. It has a distinctively striking appearance, that to me is both very symmetric and tangible. The infinite families of uniform compound polyhedra UC20 through UC25 tend to be overlooked, so this image being featured could bring some attention to these, through this one example of a uniform antiprismatic compound.
Articles in which this image appears
Compound of four tetrahedra
FP category for this image
Featured pictures/Sciences/Mathematics
Creator
JeffUK
  • Support as nominatorRadlrb (talk) 06:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – Brightly colored, moving depiction is distracting and annoying. – Sca (talk) 13:28, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    When I asked if people about this model in the Tea house, people said they'd prefer a rotating model. I can make it move more smoothly. Also, colors are supposed to be bright for these models, the only darker colors available are generally reserved for regular, semiregular and other more important uniform polytopes. Radlrb (talk) 04:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – Toylike, not among Wiki's best. --Janke | Talk 19:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    What's wrong with toy-like? Aren't all 3D polytope models toy-like? Radlrb (talk) 04:13, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's the flat lighting and the saturated coloring. Try another shading algorithm to make it look more natural... Also, there are a lot of spurious pixels in the background area. Janke | Talk 07:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Absolutely, thank you. I'll cook something up really nice. It's comical because I didn't zoom in, and while these images are heavier in general, I thought it was cleaner than it is. There is something I like about the pixelation as is when you zoom in, it's electric. For our purposes something cleaner is naturally needed. Radlrb (talk) 08:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • CommentRadlrb, for me the main issue is the 250x250 pixel size. It's good enough for infobox, but I like to see something bigger, say 500x500 pixels or larger when I open the image in its own window. I will support if that's done. Bammesk (talk) 15:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Will do! I might not get to it by the 13th, if so I'll renominate once it is cleaned. I might modernize it slightly too. TY Radlrb (talk) 02:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – I agree with Bammesk, I was thinking the same. Please consider that 250×250 looks tiny on high dpi displays. I wouldn't go under 500×500 pixels and stay above if possible. I wonder if the movement could be smoother, too, and if the colours can be reworked to look prettier. Thank you :) --Lion-hearted85 (talk) 16:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'll address all of these : ) Hopefully in time! tyvm Radlrb (talk) 02:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sunrise and Sugarloaf Mountain[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Feb 2023 at 15:54:28 (UTC)

Original – Sunrise in Rio de Janeiro with Sugarloaf Mountain, seen from Tijuca Park.
Reason
High resolution, high EV. This file was a finalist in Picture of the Year 2016. Featured picture on Wikimedia Commons, and a featured picture on the Persian language Wikipedia.
Articles in which this image appears
Sugarloaf Mountain
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
Donatas Dabravolskas
  • Support as nominatorVinícius O. (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support A bit noisy, especially noticeable in the middle of the picture. But considering the impressive beauty of the motif, it is of secondary importance. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Looking at the sky, I see some severe banding and pixelation - is this due to my laptop's LCD screen, or can other people notice the banding? Janke | Talk 08:06, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Janke, the banding exists around the sun but is almost unnoticeable, even when zoomed in. — Nythar (💬-❄️) 09:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)\Reply[reply]
      • I'm not seeing anything either. There are pixels in the shadows, as one would expect, but overall this looks to be high quality.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:03, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I don't see banding either. Just a small lens flare in lower right side. Bammesk (talk) 15:43, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I had another look on my desktop 27-inch display - no banding. Thus, support. --Janke | Talk 13:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support -- Nythar (💬-❄️) 09:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support – the infobox image [2] is a good depiction of the mountain and I'd have supported its nomination. But if we are ever going to have a qualifying sunrise or sunset photo, the nom image would qualify. It shows the city (Rio) in the foreground and is a well rounded and attractive balance of foreground and background, including the mountain. Bammesk (talk) 15:56, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Palm cockatoo[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2023 at 16:43:54 (UTC)

Original – A palm cockatoo (Probosciger aterrimus). Lockhart, Queensland, Australia
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC last year, where it was featured unanimously. Previous nomination ended up at 3-0.
Articles in which this image appears
Palm cockatoo
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
JJ Harrison

Green iguana[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2023 at 14:16:23 (UTC)

Original – A green iguana in Palm Beach, Florida
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC two weeks ago, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears
Green iguana
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator
Rhododendrites
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 14:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - It takes gumption to do a panorama of a living, breathing creature, let alone to do it well! Great image.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also a comment: Might be worth crediting PetarM, as his edit of this image is the one that Rhododendrites uploaded and had featured.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Hey Chris Woodrich i was already mentioned there, no need for anymore. It was more a "homework" for me, since i think it's Rhododendrites best shot and i really like all, from colors, great "light" - some great reflextion. Probably that's why iguana was sunbathing or good sunny-enlighted place. --Petar Milošević (talk) 11:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sunset Park, Brooklyn[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2023 at 20:04:20 (UTC)

Original – Waterfront view of Sunset Park, Brooklyn, New York, shows the old Bush Terminal warehouse complex between 39th and 44th Streets.
Reason
Quality waterfront view of the Sunset Park neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York. It shows a section of the former Bush Terminal warehouse complex between 39th and 44th Streets, including the remains of the terminal's seven major piers. The image relates to the section of the articles it is in. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Sunset Park, Brooklyn, Industry City
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama or Urban
Creator
Rhododendrites
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 20:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per nom. Is this worth including in the Industry City article, or is this section of the warehouse complex not considered part of said area? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it can be added to Industry City. All buildings (5 in foreground and 2 in background) are also in the 1958 lead image in Industry City (background buildings can be ID-ed with the help of this, exterior colors have changed). The depicted area (in nom image) is part of the warehouse and storage section of Industry City, next to the 7 covered piers (only traces of the piers remain now). See Industry City article section "Description" paragraph 2 and section "Piers and storage" paragraphs 1 and 2. Bammesk (talk) 13:04, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added the image to the Industry City article: [3] Bammesk (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Roosilawaty[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2023 at 02:53:07 (UTC)

Original – Indonesian film actress Roosilawaty in a promotional silver-print image
Reason
Excellent, high quality image of an Indonesian film star. This image admittedly has a checkered past, what with having been promoted as Chitra Dewi, then delisted when we realized she'd been misidentified. Now that Roosilawaty has her own article, however, things should be golden; we also have an image of her with her autograph scrawled across it, as well as numerous other images identified with text beside them, supporting the ID.
Articles in which this image appears
Roosilawaty
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Tati Photo Studio, Jakarta; restored by Chris Woodrich
  • Support as nominator –  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – Low-res., particularly indistinct on right side (subject's left) of subject's head. – Sca (talk) 14:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Unfortunately, as I no longer have any of my collection, that is the highest resolution we are going to get. As this was one of my first scans from my Tati archive, I didn't have the process as streamlined or standardized as later works. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support – per previous nom, now that it's identified. Bammesk (talk) 18:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. MER-C 14:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support--Petar Milošević (talk) 10:56, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Georgia Guidestones[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2023 at 15:19:50 (UTC)

Original – The Georgia Guidestones, an "American Stonehenge"
Reason
One of the big eccentricities of America was bombed last year. Given we now can't get more pictures of them, I think the images we have are now extremely valuable
Articles in which this image appears
Georgia Guidestones
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator
Bubba73
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 15:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - Technically, there are a few "woulda, shoulda, couldas"; less lens distortion, less tight crop, etc. But that's moot now that the monument is gone, and so I would support this on technique and quality. It is well lit, very encyclopedic, and irreplacable. What is the copyright status of the work itself, though? The rusty part of my brain that dealt with copyright questions is telling me that FOP doesn't cover three-dimensional artwork in the United States.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I corrected the lens distortion with DxO PhotoLab on the RAW file, but there is perspective distortion. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • My apologies; I've only taken my camera out rarely, and am rusty on a lot of the terminology. I was referring primarily to the warping of the grass and dirt at the bottom edge of the image; the monument itself looks fine.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • No problem. For some reason, I was using my 35mm lens, which does enhance perspective distortion. Normally I would use a lens with a longer focal length and get farther back, which would reduce the perspective distortion. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 16:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • For sure! I know I nearly retired my 18-35 mm because of the distortion. Any which way, glad to have this here.  — Chris Woodrich (talk)
    Think this comes under "no copyright notice" Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 07:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Referring to the Hirtle Chart, there doesn't really seem to be anything for works of sculpture (it explicitly states "This table is for image and text works"). Assuming that the table for "Works except sound recordings and architecture" also applies to sculpture, the creator of the Guidestones had five years to register a claim if no notice was included with the sculpture. I'll see if I can find anything for "Robert Christian", "Elberton Granite Finishing Company", or "Guidestones". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - After reviewing the LOC Copyright catalogue, I have found nothing for the finishing company, only conspiracy books for the Guidestones, and a series of books on Bayesian statistics by Christian Robert (nothing for Robert Christian). I am satisfied that there is no copyright registration for this sculpture, and based on available photographs there appears to have been no notice included with it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • comment Might be able to crop something better out of File:The Georgia Guidstones.jpg.©Geni (talk) 16:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I've given it a go, but honestly the fact that much of the monument is in shadows makes me feel that it's an inferior alternative (as an aside... that image is pretty good for a cell phone). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:10, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Yeah its a bit annoying that we have a bunch of photos that would be great if they weren't over processed.©Geni (talk) 01:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I like the fact that this one shows through the sculpture, but on the downside: (1) it is in shadow, and (2) it isn't very sharp. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Supportthe bottom left corner needs to be cloned. I also support what's proposed by Geni. Bammesk (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Bammesk: Should be done. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 10:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note File:Georgia Guidestones, alternate.jpg is the other photo I took, except that I blurred out my wife. It shows the geometry a little better, but it has some drawbacks. She thinks the other one is better. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nominations — to be closed[edit]

Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.

Older nominations requiring additional input from users[edit]

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

Closing procedure[edit]

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.

When promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
    • Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
    Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Add the image to:
  3. Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
    The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
  4. Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
  5. Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
  6. If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
  7. Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  8. If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the February archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Delist closing procedure[edit]

Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  3. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.

If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Recently closed nominations[edit]

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Messier 83[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2023 at 16:22:36 (UTC)

Reason
High resolution.
Articles in which this image appears
Messier 83
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)
  • Support as nominatorTheFreeWorld (talk) 16:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - Would prefer an image showing the entire galaxy (example: [4], or this: [5]) - this feels too cropped and significantly reduces EV. --Janke | Talk 17:04, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support – I am Ok with the EV, per article editors' choice. The high resolution is a plus. Bammesk (talk) 18:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Crop works fine for me.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Crop works well for me, too, it makes the picture focused, and the resolution is quite impressive. --Lion-hearted85 (talk) 16:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:04, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Human karyotype[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 17:10:00 (UTC)

OriginalKaryogram of human genome
Reason
Quality image of human karyogram, it gives an overview of the human genome. The image is used in numerous articles (50+). There is a SVG version, but the SVG is not used in any articles (it has rendering issues). If and when the SVG replaces this file, then we can do a delist and replace nom. I had an easier time enlarging this file with ZoomViewer [6], which is linked to on the file page. Currently at Commons FPC as well.
Articles in which this image appears
Human genome, Karyotype, + many more
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Biology
Creator
Mikael Häggström
  • Support as nominatorBammesk (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support as creator. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:17, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – Visual information is not readily intelligible to general readers/viewers. – Sca (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Can you clarify which featured picture criteria does this candidate image not meet? OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    What about No.3 "It illustrates the subject in a compelling way". I feel uncompelled. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I intentionally kept any prose out of the image in order to keep it relatively language neutral, and indeed that makes it not readily intelligible without reading the image caption in each article. Still, in this case, I think that sense of incomprehensibility is a valuable impression in itself, as the complexity of the human genome is indeed daunting and, still today, largely enigmatic. Mikael Häggström (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    FWIW, the criterion is "helps readers to understand an article", not "readily intelligible to general readers/viewers". Bammesk (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Criterion. – Sca (talk) 14:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. We need more FPs that are encyclopedic scientific illustrations, relative to the huge proportion currently taken by postcard views, charismatic megafauna, and old poster scans. This is a good example: informative, detailed, and well laid out. Incidentally, the kneejerk opposition to including any such content, on display above, is a large part of why my recent participation in FPC has been so limited. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:16, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Looking at the image tells me nothing. My cognitive facilities are quiescent, and my knees aren't jerking -- Sca (talk) 13:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I didn't oppose, but it is impolite to call a reasoned oppose a 'kneejerk reaction'. I'm capable of understanding many scientific diagrams, but I don't think this enhances the article enough for it to be FP. Without any text, I look at the image and click away. That is not what you want for a top-notch image in an encyclopaedia. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Text in illustrations is often helpful, but is not uniformly a positive thing: for instance, it makes them much more difficult to internationalize, compared to illustrations where the relevant text is presented in a caption. Have you ever opposed a photograph because it was lacking text? —David Eppstein (talk) 01:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I actually had someone comment (couldn't oppose as they were an IP) against a nomination because the scale was not labeled on the photograph itself.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment, leaning support - That is massive, to the point that you could probably print this on a full sheet of A2 paper and still be downsizing. How much information would be lost by reducing it to, say, 60% of its current size? (Honestly, it's a shame the SVG has rendering issues...) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Chris, with this type of image, sometimes there is more to it than visual display, printing and such. Sometimes minute details are incorporated as a means of tabulating data (or information) precisely. That way the image can be enlarged on a computer screen and the data read off the image precisely. I am not an expert in genetics, but I see lots of grid marks, so that might be the case. Bammesk (talk) 02:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That's fair. My question was mainly driven by the fact that, even at 60 percent resolution, the text was perfectly legible on my display and it felt as though no fine details were being lost (the reference to the A2/poster size was mainly to highlight just how many pixels were there). Given that, due to the resolution, a lot of browsers have trouble loading the image, I was simply wondering if a smaller size would be workable to improve accessibility.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    With slight worries about how it handles the sex chromosomes - it seems a bit... redundant to have both an XY and XX set without any obvious difference in the three X's, Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 00:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. MER-C 14:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Promoted File:Human karyotype with bands and sub-bands.png --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Banz Abbey[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 15:09:21 (UTC)

Original – Drone image of Banz Abbey
Reason
Recently featured on Commons. Note discussion of the one oppose vote - the abbey is surrounded by "no drone" areas.
Articles in which this image appears
Banz Abbey
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Ermell
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 15:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 16:10, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • SupportVinícius O. (talk) 14:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support – Interesting discussion at the Commons about the drone restrictions. Hats off to the creator for respecting the restriction, even if it meant having to crop the original image because he couldn't get any closer. (I am unimpressed by the argument that there are "so many points in Germany where, in theory, drones are not allowed" that we should all just feel free to ignore such restrictions whenever it suits us to do so.) Choliamb (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • SupportLion-hearted85 (talk) 20:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Promoted File:Kloster Banz Luftbild-20220921-RM-122046.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Grey shrikethrush[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 15:03:58 (UTC)

Original – Colluricincla harmonica harmonica
Reason
High resolution, illustrates article well.
Articles in which this image appears
Grey shrikethrush
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
John Harrison
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 15:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Not one of his best. Bird is looking away. Hasn't been put up for FP on Commons yet. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - When it comes to birds, one of JJ's "not his best" can still readily be FP worthy. In this case, it appears that the focus was slightly off (beak and eye appears slightly out of focus), but given the resolution, focal distance, and size of the bird, I don't think it's a deal breaker. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – Essentially monochromatic hues result in minimal contrast with background. Doesn't meet Criterion 3, IMO. – Sca (talk) 13:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Delist: Bastei[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 14:33:14 (UTC)

Bastei (Elbe Sandstone Mountains) in Saxony, Germany.
Reason
Replaced with recently promoted, higher resolution FP File:Rathen und Elbsandsteingebirge asv2022-08 img04.jpg.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bastei
Nominator
MER-C
  • DelistMER-C 14:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • DelistBammesk (talk) 14:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • DelistCholiamb (talk) 19:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delist Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • DelistSca (talk) 14:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep – Comparing the two, the candidate (Bastei) has softer and more even lighting, which I prefer. The second (...img04.jpg) seems to have a bit aggressive local contrast. Composition is more balanced in my opinion, too. Resolution is about 40.5 MP vs 36 MP, which is a very slight 11% more. --Lion-hearted85 (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep – I see no compelling reason to delist, since it is a good alternative re. weather, clouding etc. Janke | Talk 10:21, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep - Honestly, I prefer this one to the the cooler colours of the new FP. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • While there is no consensus to delist this image, an image that isn't used in any articles can not retain it's featured status and is therefore delisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Paço Imperial[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 01:45:20 (UTC)

Original – Paço Imperial, the official workplace of the monarchs of Brazil during the royal and imperial eras
Reason
High quality, high EV
Articles in which this image appears
Brazilian imperial family
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Donatas Dabravolskas
  • Support as nominatorVinícius O. (talk) 01:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Clearly not FP standard - chromatic aberration, out of focus, perspective distortion. MER-C 10:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - That Nikon 16-35 mm lens is known for having poor edge sharpness at 16 mm, see [7]. Wide-angle zooms can't reach the image quality of fixed-focal-length WA lenses. --Janke | Talk 11:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment This is your ninth open nomination. Far too many I think Vinícius O.. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:37, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You're right Vinícius O. (talk) 22:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per MER-C – Choliamb (talk) 19:26, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Regretfully Oppose due to the expressed optical flaws (chromatic aberration and out of focus on the edges, especially on the left side). Otherwise, it would have been a very nice shot with favourable lighting for both the imperial building and the skyscraper. --Lion-hearted85 (talk) 11:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:39, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suspended nominations[edit]

This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.