Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

Skip to:

Table of contents
Current nominations
To be closed
More input needed
Recently closed
Suspended candidates

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).

Shortcuts

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?

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

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

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

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

To see recent changes, purge the page cache.

FPCs needing feedback view edit
	Apple Fire
	Zhangjiajie National Forest Park

Current nominations

The Skeleton Dance

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2025 at 21:23:02 (UTC)

Original – The Skeleton Dance is a 1929 Silly Symphony animated short subject with a comedy horror theme. It was produced and directed by Walt Disney and animated by Ub Iwerks. In the film, four human skeletons dance and make music around a spooky graveyard—a modern film example of medieval European "danse macabre" imagery. It is the first entry in the Silly Symphony series. In 1993, to coincide with the opening of Mickey's Toontown in Disneyland, a shortened cover of the cartoon's music was arranged to be featured in the land's background ambiance. The short's copyright was renewed in 1957, and as a published work from 1929, it entered the US public domain on January 1, 2025.

Reason: one of the most iconic 1920s animations shorts
Articles in which this image appears: The Skeleton Dance, Walt Disney Animation Studios
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
Creator: Walt Disney

Support as nominator – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delist and Replace: Flinders Street Station, Melbourne

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2025 at 18:47:08 (UTC)

Reason: higher resolution, better quality
Articles this image appears in: Flinders Street railway station, Flinders Street, Melbourne, History of Melbourne, Trams in Melbourne, Portal:Architecture, etc.
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Swanston and Flinders St intersection 1927.jpg
Nominator: Yann (talk)

Delist and replace — Yann (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This was mentioned in Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates, so I thought I could do it. Restoring the broken glass plate version is beyond my competence, but this is already much better than the current FP. Yann (talk) 19:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uranus Building after the 2024 Hualien earthquake

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2025 at 17:43:42 (UTC)

Reason: high EV, perspective corrected image
Articles this image appears in: 2024 Hualien earthquake, List of earthquakes in 2024
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/2024 Hualien earthquake
Nominator: Yann (talk)

Support as nominator — Yann (talk) 17:43, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: Why is this a delist and replace? The first image isn’t featured. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I forgot that the first nomination was withdrawn. Fixed. Yann (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poster for the 1919 revival of The Sorcerer

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2025 at 07:58:19 (UTC)

Reason: Nice example of H. M. Brock's work, probably reasonable size given the detail of the drawing.
Articles in which this image appears: H. M. Brock, The Sorcerer
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: H. M. Brock, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delist and Replace:

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2025 at 01:16:40 (UTC)

Reason: Higher resolution; no yellowish tint
Articles this image appears in: Skull of a Skeleton with Burning Cigarette
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Skull with cigarette by Vincent van Gogh
Nominator: ArionStar (talk)

Delist and Replace — ArionStar (talk) 01:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas)

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2025 at 11:39:02 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Green sea turtle
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support EV, good light and colors, high level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that there is an extant FP of this species (that is below the current minimum resolution). blameless 05:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it has not been used for many years. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Red-necked grebe

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2025 at 11:46:18 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image. Adds value to article. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Red-necked grebe
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cane toad

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2025 at 11:48:20 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. Adds EV to article. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Cane toad
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:18, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

E Ink screen updating

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2025 at 15:58:57 (UTC)

Original – From the file page: "E Ink Screen updating slowed to 25% of real time. This allows the viewer to see how the microspheres in the screen respond to display input."

Reason: Good EV for its article but also fascinating overall as a closeup (and slo-mo) recording of an everyday item in action. ~~I don't think the brightening effect near the end is bloom; in my experience, E Ink displays sort of oversteer when they refresh, then bounce back a bit.~~ Actually, watching it some more, it might be bloom; either way, I leave it to the community to decide whether the gain in details on the dark grains is worth the loss of detail in the light ones.
Articles in which this image appears: E Ink
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Electronics
Creator: Alexander Gee

Support as nominator – Moonreach (talk) 15:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Visual information not readily intelligible to general readers/viewers. – Sca (talk) 18:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree that it's pretty abstract, but that's why it has a caption and a target article, for context. Moonreach (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Browning

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2025 at 10:38:29 (UTC)

Reason: A particularly fine Woodburytype of a notable poet.
Articles in which this image appears: Robert Browning +2
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: Herbert Rose Barraud, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 10:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 17:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:19, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lysander Spooner

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2025 at 04:02:30 (UTC)

Reason: Stable lead image for a notable person, now done being restored.
Articles in which this image appears: Lysander Spooner, the version with the card mount now appears in Amory Nelson Hardy. Added it to a few others just now, which probably isn't relevant to voting.
FP category for this image: Maybe Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political? He was a political theorist more than a politician, but it's not /Politicians for a reason
Creator: Amory Nelson Hardy, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Considering the date of the photo (1887 or before) and Adam's edits, it's a very good one with a relatively high quality. – Hamid Hassani (talk) 08:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too yellow, especially compared to the above nomination. Yann (talk) 17:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's the natural colour. A Woodburytype is going to look different from a standard cabinet card (I believe usually an albumin print? Could be wrong). Making them look the same hides the difference. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 18:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Macrodactyla doreensis

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 11:21:39 (UTC)

Reason: Unanimously featured on Commons. Headline image.
Articles in which this image appears: Macrodactyla doreensis
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Cnidaria
Creator: Diego Delso

Support as nominator – MER-C 11:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Educational, high resolution and the contrast between the yellow subject and the blue background works very well. -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great kiskadee

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 10:55:24 (UTC)

Reason: Unanimously featured on Commons. Headline image.
Articles in which this image appears: Great kiskadee, Tyrant flycatcher
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – MER-C 10:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rocinha

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 03:15:23 (UTC)

Reason: High EV, quality and huge resolution
Articles in which this image appears: Rocinha, etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator: Chensiyuan

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 03:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please stop nominating photos. Max amount of noms is 4 and you’ve passed the amount. For now, wait until you have less than 4 pictures currently candidates and then you can nominate another Wcamp9 (talk) 01:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a strict number, but you have 10 nominations, and none of them are passing. Piling more nominations atop that just decreases the chance of the older ones passing. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 05:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI that ArionStar was indefinitely banned from participating at FPC + blocked for 12 months (before it was changed to an indef for socking) on Commons for this exact behaviour. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:51, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zhangjiajie National Forest Park

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 03:18:42 (UTC)

Reason: High EV, quality and huge resolution
Articles in which this image appears: Zhangjiajie National Forest Park
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator: Chensiyuan

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 03:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daguerrotypist

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 02:39:46 (UTC)

pin on his vest

daguerreotype knob

Reason: A daguerrotype of a daguerrotypist, which I personally find to be pretty cool since that was the first widely available photograph method. I can upload a version with a white background instead of a frame. I find my restoration to be alright for 1845, but you can edit it if you find smaller errorsa
Articles in which this image appears: Daguerreotype, Photographer
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator: unknown author / restored by Wcamp9

Support as nominator – Wcamp9 (talk) 02:39, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't replace the frame unless a copyright is being claimed on the scan: Those frames are very typical - honestly, kind of identifying - for daguerrotypes. ~~Support~~. Few dust spots upper left in the photo part, not too important, but worth fixing. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to fix Wcamp9 (talk) 20:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Yann (talk) 17:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as is – The restoration needs more work. The original is at This link. The original's link should be on the restoration's file page, and identified as such. See for example any one of Adam's FPs. Comparing the restoration to the original, 1- the pin on his vest has disappeared (see thumbnail to the right), 2- the knobs on one of the daguerreotype casings has disappeared (see thumbnail to the right), 3- there is a scratch line on his right eyelid which can be improved, 4- on the restored image there is a dark shade on the frame which he is holding (see where the frame meets his shoulder), this shade is not on the original. Other smaller improvements can be made as well, for example on his shirt, but the four items I listed are the major ones. Bammesk (talk) 02:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can help putting them back in if needed. It's easiest dome using layers and erasing the restored image to reveal the unrestored beneath it - presuming a colour change hasn't been done, anyway. That's why I upload so many files on the PNG. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry, I’m pretty new to restorations but I think that makes it more difficult to overlook mistakes which I confuse to be specks. I’ll try to restore back Wcamp9 (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: Jimmy Wales

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 02:32:53 (UTC)

Reason: Currently unused in article space. This was somewhat controversial when nominated due to quality. Astonishingly, despite the existence of a great many free photographs of Wales, I'm not really seeing a good candidate for a D&R; this one's OK but not used in favor of a not very good edit. If you see Mr. Wales about, please take a high quality photograph of him.
Articles this image appears in: none
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Jimmy Wales
Nominator: blameless

Delist — blameless 02:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jimbo Wales: what about it? ArionStar (talk) 03:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is your questions for Jimbo Wales? He is welcome to comment here, of course, as is any other editor, but the question here is about the image, not really anything about Wales himself. Note that the criteria require that all images be used in articles, so that's something that needs to be addressed regardless. blameless 23:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jimbo can give us a better image of himself. ArionStar (talk) 03:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not being used in an article is an automatic demote, but Delist in case some minor use appears. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 05:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Blackwood (Canadian singer)

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2025 at 00:09:43 (UTC)

Reason: High quality picture of the subject performing; featured on Commons
Articles in which this image appears: Sarah Blackwood (Canadian singer)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: — Chris Woodrich (talk)

Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! ArionStar (talk) 02:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 10:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Galileo Galilei

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2025 at 22:42:24 (UTC)

Reason: Quality lead image of Galileo Galilei
Articles in which this image appears: Galileo Galilei
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
Creator: Justus Sustermans

Support as nominator – Vinícius O. (talk) 22:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Wcamp9 (talk) 23:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support - At first the levels gave me pause, as his forehead appears awfully bright. But given that the source is explicitly the museum that holds the painting, and Fae didn't have a history of digital manipulation, this should be fairly accurate. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support FP here and on Commons surely… ArionStar (talk) 03:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 10:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is a very famous, reputable picture of Galilei. Thanks for nominating the photo of this nearly 400-year portrait of the high-ranking scientist! – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait of Napoleon II

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2025 at 22:22:27 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality and resolution.
Articles in which this image appears: Portrait of Napoleon II, Napoleon II, Thomas Lawrence etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Thomas Lawrence

Support as nominator – Vinícius O. (talk) 22:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - In case anyone is wondering, it looks like the revdeleted revisions included a non-free frame. Have asked on Commons chat. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 03:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 10:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old Stockholm telephone tower

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2025 at 17:45:37 (UTC)

Reason: restored historical picture, high EV, FP on Commons
Articles in which this image appears: Old Stockholm telephone tower
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others
Creator: Unknown photographer, restored by Yann

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Impressive cable management. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why do the aspect ratios change between this and the original? Or is that an illusion. Things look wider and squatter to me, Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 01:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think perspective correction has been applied, which has widened out the center to center-left of the frame. That's overrestoration, to me--for a historical photograph, the goal should be to represent the original image, with restoration removing some of the blemishes of time, not to "improve" on it, as it were. I think I would oppose this version, would be interested in a more conservative approach. blameless 01:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Oppose - I'm not sure the perspective correction hasn't damaged the view, and it's also a little low-contrast somehow. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 02:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Wow! – Vinícius O. (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 01:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Goniobranchus reticulatus

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2025 at 16:50:46 (UTC)

Reason: Quality lead image of this species. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Goniobranchus reticulatus
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Molluscs
Creator: Diego Delso

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 18:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Educational and good quality for an underwater picture. -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:51, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cape Manzamo

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2025 at 00:59:19 (UTC)

Reason: High EV and quality
Articles in which this image appears: Cape Manzamo, etc
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator: Cccefalon

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 00:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support though the grasslands appear a little overexposed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 00:14, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Date To Skate

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2025 at 21:45:40 (UTC)

Original – A Date to Skate is an American animated short film, released on November 18, 1938 and starring Jack Mercer as the voice of Popeye.

Reason: the one of the only popeye black and white shorts to be in the public domain
Articles in which this image appears: A Date to Skate
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
Creator: Dave Fleischer

Support as nominator – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 21:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 01:15, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The file page has a copyright license review tag. I suggest dropping a note at Commons:Help desk to have it reviewed. The source link Here says it's public domain. Support, assuming it's PD. Bammesk (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yann (talk) 17:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pandora's Box (1929)

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2025 at 13:40:48 (UTC)

Original – Pandora's Box (1929) by Georg Wilhelm Pabst

Reason: HR copy of a film
Articles in which this image appears: Pandora's Box (1929 film)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
Creator: Georg Wilhelm Pabst

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 13:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Interessant. – Sca (talk) 14:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 02:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not keen on the non-original card at the beginning, but overall quality looks good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 11:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Flying Scotsman (1929)

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2025 at 13:35:05 (UTC)

Original – The Flying Scotsman (1929) by Castleton Knight

Reason: HR copy of a film
Articles in which this image appears: The Flying Scotsman (1929 film), Castleton Knight
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
Creator: Castleton Knight

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 13:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 01:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are we sure about 1929? Copyright notice on the print is 1930. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's what is in The Flying Scotsman (1929 film). Yann (talk) 10:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The last paragraph of the article says the sound may have been added in 1930. Bammesk (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would the sound need a seperate copyright renewal? If we can get a not-renewed on it, that simplifies things. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 02:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 11:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grover Cleveland

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2025 at 01:35:23 (UTC)

Reason: why you think it meets the FPC criteria and should be featured (check criteria first)
Articles in which this image appears: ~~Grover Cleveland~~ (under talk page discussion), Presidencies of Grover Cleveland, etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Charles Milton Bell, restored by me

Support as nominator – Wcamp9 (talk) 01:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not with this yellow tint. Yann (talk) 13:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's incredibly misleading to turn sepia images black and white. It is under-contrasted, and could use a gentle levels adjustment, but the yellowness isn't the problem. 19:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC) Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 19:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adam, I will never in my life be as good a restorer as you, this was a light restoration and one of my firsts and it is a little bit bad with its issues but I’ll changed level adjustment and contrasted Wcamp9 (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a go. It's an awkward one colour-wise, so it was kind of hard - I was using layers and levels and such. Kinda low contrast in the face. You did good; the colour side is something that took me a decade to get good-ish at. Or I could just make everything black and white and pretend I'm done, I guess.Support alt Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I digress, but this is also an issue on the Grover Cleveland talk page as I feel it should be the main image since the other one has technical issues. I don’t know why, but I think we should restore another picture of Grover cleveland Wcamp9 (talk) 21:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dropped a couple good ones on the talk page. Note the TIFFs at the Smithsonian are always bigger than the JPEG downloads. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 10:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One of them is on Wikipedia and used to be the image, while the other is a side profile and if this image can’t be the main image since Cleveland isn’t looking at the camera, I don’t think the other can be Wcamp9 (talk) 18:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt I would go with a bit further contrast, but already much better. Yann (talk) 12:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt Wcamp9 (talk) 20:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT ArionStar (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Icona Pop

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2025 at 01:18:28 (UTC)

Reason: High quality
Articles in which this image appears: Icona Pop, etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: Kim Metso (cropped by Catfan660)

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 01:18, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – EV? – Sca (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A more generous crop would be better. Her knuckles are right at the border. Also feels overexposed (probably to balance the shadows... I had the same issue with In This Moment). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Navagio Beach

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2025 at 23:21:49 (UTC)

Reason: High quality
Articles in which this image appears: Navagio Beach
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator: Wilnel José Verdú Guerrero

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 23:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 04:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Vinícius O. (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A little blurry, but not bad. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apple Fire

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2025 at 18:54:28 (UTC)

Reason: High EV and quality
Articles in which this image appears: Apple Fire
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/American
Creator: San Bernardino National Forest

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 18:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I notify other voters that this user has been banned on Commons and has been insulting on this page towards another user (see previous nominations below) Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hajji

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2025 at 21:19:22 (UTC)

Reason: High EV and quality
Articles in which this image appears: Hajji
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator: Fadi El Binni

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 21:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Overly detailed & not readily comprehensible. – Sca (talk) 15:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
? ArionStar (talk) 17:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there's far too much going on here, with too sharp of a lighting contrast, for me to support this as a FP. Jay Cubby 18:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I notify other voters that the nominator has been banned on Commons and has been insulting on this page towards another user (see previous nominations below) Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m going to be honest, is this really needed? It’s irrelevant to the FPC process, and retaliatory opposing is 100% not how it’s done here. Pinging @Chsrlesjsharp: for a response. E_F⁵ 16:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Is "just a guy from Commons" an insult? ArionStar (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello wiki-admins: WP:POINT; WP:ADVOCACY? ArionStar (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArionStar posted this insult about Basile Morin. "guy from Commons / you are the most confrontational point in the Wiki Universe ever" In response to EF5, I therefore believe my alert is relevant and needed here on enwiki. And what do you mean EF5 by 'retaliatory opposing' here? You imply it is me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You sound like you want people to oppose because ArionStar's said some questionable things elsewhere, which seems like WP:HOUNDING. @Armbrust:, how do you feel about this, seeing as you do the majority of FPC promotion work? E_F⁵ 22:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First, the "Wikihounding" assumption is quite inappropriate, given that the above nominator is harassing us with crosswiki messages left by abusive sockpuppets. For example this attack on Commons left by blocked vandal SquarePortrait 10 minutes before that comment on Wikipedia. Then, Charles is allowed to vote, but has not yet done so. Greetings -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:49, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Basile Morin: You realize that doesn't make it okay to follow others around and comment on every nomination they make, right? How would you feel if I commented "this user harasses others" on every single nomination they've ever made. It is completely irrelevant to the process, and you, bluntly, are failing to adhere to WP:FOC. E_F⁵ 13:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In case you haven't followed everything, Charles is simply writing what others are also explaining in their own way here, here, here and again a little everywhere else. Happy understanding to you and have a great day. -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two of those are completely unrelated to his Commons conduct and are valid points, while the fourth appears to be a direct result of y'all hounding ArionStar. Others doing something in no way make it right to do. I don't support WikiHounding, no matter who the target is. E_F⁵ 16:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Popeye

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2025 at 21:04:56 (UTC)

Reason: High EV and good scan quality. Happy Public Domain Day, Popeye!
Articles in which this image appears: Popeye
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
Creator: E. C. Segar

~~Support~~ as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only one vote per participant. -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good quality scan? It's covered in horizontal lines and is in high-contrast greyscale, and isn't even 1500 px high - which I might waive in the absence of other issues, but makes it very hard to fix those issues. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Considering it as a 1919 strip? ArionStar (talk) 11:41, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are much better scans of it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 18:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I notify other voters that the nominator has been banned on Commons and has been insulting on this page towards another user (see previous nominations below) Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:19, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dismal quality, this is from a copy from a microfilm (hence the scratches). --Janke | Talk 19:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wondered if that was the case. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 00:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT - Looks darn good, and resolution is more than 4k on the long side. Pinging Charlesjsharp, Janke, Adam Cuerden, and ArionStar. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"1-17", in the lower right corner, is missing. ArionStar (talk) 02:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not in the version published in Liverpool, but there are traces where it was. Will borrow from the Washington Times copy. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT Good work, thank you so much! ArionStar (talk) 03:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both versions. Only 1,140 pixels height on the edited version, and even at this size, it's not sharp enough. Low level of detail if you compare for example the strokes on the boat, frame 1 or 4, with File:The Thimble Theatre (January 17, 1929) "'Gobs'" of Work).jpg. Concerning the grey version, it was nominated last week on Commons by The American Person, invalid sockpuppet of blocked user ArionStar and it is clearly a very poor scan. -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin: maybe due to time (a 1929 strip), wouldn't it be a little difficult to get strictly faithful scans? ArionStar (talk) 04:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Info For the record, the hereby nominator is harassing me with crosswiki messages left by abusive sockpuppet accounts. See for example this edit on Commons left by blocked vandal SquarePortrait 10 minutes before that one here above on Wikipedia. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- (ec)Unfortunately, The Complete E.C. Segar Popeye (1984) removes the copyright notice that was in the original work - it also arranges the panels in a 2-2-1 format, which was found in some newspapers and would allow the existing digital copies to be more than 1500px. I'll keep an eye out for a better scan. As for the behavioural issues... while concerning, I don't think Popeye should suffer for it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unsharp mask helped quite a bit. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd Support Alt Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't want to suffer for Popeye. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reconnaissance de la Terre Adelie, le 20 Janvier 1840

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2025 at 06:59:56 (UTC)

Reason: A fine image of one of the voyages of Antarctic exploration
Articles in which this image appears: (In alphabetical order) Adélie Land, European and American voyages of scientific exploration, French ship Astrolabe (1811), History of Antarctica, Jules Dumont d'Urville, Territorial claims in Antarctica
FP category for this image: Either Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others or Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator: Léon Sabatier after Louis Le Breton and Auguste Étienne François Mayer, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 06:59, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although the Captain would not be under so much sail close to icebergs in this amount of wind... Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that's an artistic convention. It's rare you don't see ships at full mast in art. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 14:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Yann (talk) 13:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 02:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 08:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations — to be closed

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

Older nominations requiring additional input from users

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

Closing procedure

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Armbrust/closeFPC.js

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

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

When promoted, perform the following:

Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:

Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG

Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
Add the image to:
- Template:Announcements/New featured content - newest on top, remove the oldest so that 15 are listed at all times.
- Wikipedia:Goings-on - newest on bottom.
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs - newest on top.
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.
Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

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

Delist closing procedure

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:

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.
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.
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:

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.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
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:

Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.

Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

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

Recently closed nominations

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.

The Cocoanuts

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2025 at 14:23:55 (UTC)

Original – The Cocoanuts is a 1929 pre-Code musical comedy film starring the Marx Brothers (Groucho, Harpo, Chico, and Zeppo). Produced for Paramount Pictures by Walter Wanger, who is not credited, the film also stars Mary Eaton, Oscar Shaw, Margaret Dumont and Kay Francis. The first sound film to credit more than one director (Robert Florey and Joseph Santley), it was adapted to the screen by Morrie Ryskind from the George S. Kaufman Broadway musical play. Five of the film's tunes were composed by Irving Berlin, including "When My Dreams Come True", sung by Oscar Shaw and Mary Eaton.

Reason: the first film of the Marx Brothers
Articles in which this image appears: The Cocoanuts
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
Creator: The Marx Brothers

Support as nominator – Carlosmarkos2345 (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Very blurry in places (e.g. between 50 and 60 minutes)... Is this the best possible scan? --Janke | Talk 14:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Having watched it all the way through, I think it was cobbled together from at least two separate prints, one of which is markedly worse than the other(s). I remember seeing something similar done with Metropolis years ago in a restoration that added back old cut material that had recently been rediscovered. With that in mind, this probably is the best possible version, at least online. Moonreach (talk) 15:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Moonreach (talk) 16:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Yann (talk) 13:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 02:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 04:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:The Cocoanuts (1929).webm --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:24, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patience

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2025 at 04:02:51 (UTC)

Reason: Lead image in Patience (opera) for years (in a lower-quality version), and from the première production.
Articles in which this image appears: Patience (opera) +4
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: J. W. (for the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company/Clement Smith and Company), restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Moonreach (talk) 19:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:45, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 19:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 02:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Souvenir program for the première production of Gilbert and Sullivan's Patience - Cover.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:40, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pilger twin tornadoes

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2025 at 19:07:13 (UTC)

Reason: Y'all have probably seen photos of a tornado, maybe even a strong one, but have you ever seen an image of two separate large and violent (EF4) tornadoes on the ground at the same time? This image is of the freak of nature that was the 2014 Pilger, Nebraska, tornado family. Absolutely amazing public domain image of two deadly tornadoes (each took a life). If that wasn't enough, the leftmost tornado would achieve the unofficial highest forward speed ever recorded in a tornado shortly after this image was taken. While it hasn't been seven days (it's been five since upload), it should be fine as it was to replace a lower-quality image. I think the pure historical value of this should be able to override the weird fence blur on the right side of the image. Currently getting it renamed, but that shouldn't affect the FPC. Both tornadoes looked wildly different, hence the high EV in that not all tornadoes look like a cone.
Articles in which this image appears: 2014 Pilger, Nebraska, tornado family, Tornado records, Tornado outbreak of June 16–18, 2014, Tornado
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
Creator: Brent Koops

Support as nominator – E_F⁵ 19:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sorry but the quality is just not there. The thumbnail suffers from chromatic aberrations, and at full size there's a clear lack of sharpness. Low level of detail, and the image is noisy with artifacts. The fence is showing motion blur with ghost effect. The subject is impressive, but on a technical level, the picture is not one of the best of the website in my opinion. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Basile Morin: Look sharp to me at full size, can you point to where there's a lack of sharpness? E_F⁵ 02:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I see the motion blur as well. It is very clear on the most right two fence posts (which are nearly duplicated in width due to the motion blur) and in the grass near the right side as well. Photo was most certainly taken from a moving vehicle, which created the motion blur. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of sharpness is everywhere on the grass, and the tornado. -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - More than 2x up-sampled from original, doesn't help the quality at all. My guess is that it is taken through a car windshield, which would explain the aberrations. --Janke | Talk 09:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Agree with the technical critiques above, but the image size is huge; were it halved in size on both dimensions I don't think we'd see anything more than moderate graininess acceptable for the conditions. The composition is fantastic, and with one-of-a-kind shots I'd argue that's what really matters. Moonreach (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This camera records a maximum of 5184 × 3456 pixels, and the photo measures 10,800 × 7,200 pixels, thus it is either a photomontage or more likely heavily upscaled (434 %). I don't think we should encourage this kind of practice. The issues mentioned above are also visible at lower resolution. Interesting picture for documentation (like many others) but not a FP according to the quality criteria. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, I see too much gray. Jay Cubby 18:56, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Kherson-Mykolaiv Offensive

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2025 at 19:10:05 (UTC)

Reason: Really high quality map (6000 × 4,624 pixels) with really good EV.
Articles in which this image appears: Battle of Kherson, Russian occupation of Kherson Oblast, Several non-EN Wiki articles (other language articles)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Maps
Creator: Rr016

Support as nominator – The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Very valuable to the articles it is in, and well done. I would certainly support it after the war ends and is followed by peace. For now it's too much of a reminder (to me) of bloodshed. This is just my personal opinion, not really based on the FP criteria. That's why it's a comment, not a vote. Consider it a "conditional support" for the future (hopefully not the distant future). Bammesk (talk) 04:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tsuchinshan–ATLAS

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2025 at 16:22:06 (UTC)

Reason: Quality lead image of this comet. This is a composite image, in other words the same scene was shot twice (the comet was tracked, and the foreground was not). See image page for details.
Articles in which this image appears: C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan–ATLAS)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator: Jim Vajda

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 16:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — It's a beautiful shot, but up close there's a distracting stencil effect on the trees where the two parts of the image were composited. Moonreach (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, that's the tradeoff of merging the two images, one has to draw a mask somewhere. Not a showstopper IMO. Bammesk (talk) 02:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We've traditionally been pretty against composites of this sort, but they've also usually been much more misleading, not stating they were a composite in advance. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 01:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh I know, composite photos can be misleading and most of the time are unreal. A composite like we have here is for all practical purposes a Double exposure, in other words shooting the same scene twice in a short time span. A double (or multiple) exposure is not considered a composite, people do it all the time, in the past and at present, for example in Focus stacking, in High Dynamic Range photography, etc. We have example FPs both historic and modern here and here. Even This image is a true multiple exposure (soon to be FP). The nom image isn't any different, it could easily have been called a double exposure. The technique is sometimes necessary and has always been accepted as legit. There is nothing deceptive about it. A composite photo in its common sense is a very different type of photo and/or art. The nom image isn't that. Bammesk (talk) 03:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair. Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support ArionStar (talk) 04:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support although I think the compositing could be better, using a softer mask. --Janke | Talk 15:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Comet Tsuchinshan–ATLAS over Ohio (Composite).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArtScience Museum

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2025 at 11:53:50 (UTC)

Reason: Featured on Commons. Headline image.
Articles in which this image appears: ArtScience Museum etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Basile Morin

Support as nominator – MER-C 11:53, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Many thanks, MER-C, for the nomination. And I am also very grateful for the inclusion of this image in the dedicated article. -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:ArtScience Museum, Marina Bay Sands, Singapore.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ustyurt Nature Reserve

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2025 at 11:44:49 (UTC)

Reason: Unanimously featured on Commons. Headline image.
Articles in which this image appears: Ustyurt Nature Reserve
FP category for this image: WIkipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator: Максат79

Support as nominator – MER-C 11:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support In Dali's dramatic style, impressive relief, and high image resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Moonreach (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Марсианский пейзаж впадины Карынжарык. Вдали Три Батыра.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Besalú

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 08:28:22 (UTC)

Reason: Good picture to capture the town's atmosphere. Overall quality is good enough IMO, especially for 2008.
Articles in which this image appears: Besalú
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator: Mikipons

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 08:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Good lighting & texture; nice comp. – Sca (talk) 16:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appealing composition, interesting building and compelling light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 01:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Pont Besalú 1.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyo Skytree

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 04:37:14 (UTC)

Reason: High EV and quality
Articles in which this image appears: Tokyo Skytree
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Basile Morin

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 04:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain and ⚠️ warning as photographer / uploader.

Not playing this game with blocked user ArionStar who seems to have fun using sockpuppets to SPAM my talk page very recently on Commons.

I would be grateful if maintenance workers / administrators speedy close this nomination that may embarrass everyone in case of probable failure, since the photo is not the head image of the article and just a ridiculous provocation. Not sure the rules on Wikipedia allow a "creator" to withdraw someone else's nomination like here on Commons.

For the record, 3 sockpuppets of ArionStar have been blocked last 5 days on the main image platform for similar provocations.

Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only the nominator can withdrawn a nomination and I don’t see any reason to speedily close this. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ambrust, for the clarification on this point. Now if you want my point of view concerning the "encyclopedic value" of this photo, as requested per WP:WIAFP, I honestly believe a worm's-eye view has an artistic value,💡fine for the purposes of Commons but much less an encyclopedic one, suitable for this project. For this subject, the accent of the illustration should be made on a simple / descriptive appearance of the tower. Proportions are totally altered in comparison to the current head image of the article. All the best -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Given that Basile Morin has been involved in the investigation on Commons to help discover ArionStar's massive sockpuppetry, and given that he has been vocal in calling out Arion's behaviour, I would suggest that for Arion to nominate one of Basile's photographs that is likely to fail is a form of taunt or harassment. Cmao20 (talk) 12:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He is the mockery in person. @Basile Morin: just play the game, I beg! ArionStar (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

💤 -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, Cmao20. The above comment, just after this, this, this... speaks volumes about this individual's intentions. Simply {{withdraw}} to be reasonable. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simply no for now. ArionStar (talk) ArionStar (talk) 17:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buddha of Ibiraçu

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 00:00:00 (UTC)

Reason: High quality and EV
Articles in which this image appears: Buddha of Ibiraçu
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator: ArionStar

Support as nominator – ArionStar (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
⚠️ Caution:

This article was vandalized by the same photographer and nominator last August with a similar photo of Buddha taken 40 minutes later.
There is of course a high risk of recurrence, because the photographer, who promised "not to disrupt anymore" has never stopped vandalizing. Now indefinitely blocked on Commons, the same person is continuing with sockpuppets like Aliphotography blocked a few days ago, Green Cabo and The American Person blocked today.
See also "Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Archive" mentioned today by a sockpuppet of this vandal on a recent Featured Picture Candidate. -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care you (guys from Commons) think about me at all. You, Basile, are the most confrontational point in the Wiki Universe ever. Lack of mutual appreciation. ArionStar (talk) 15:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arion, you literally created two new sockpuppets yesterday so you could nominate four pictures at once and break Commons rules. And this was only days after a previous sockpuppet was banned. You have vandalised Commons FPC with illegitimate accounts and lied about the identity of the sockpuppets when called out on them. You're not succeeding in trying to make Basile, who has broken no rules, into the villain, and it's entirely reasonable for us to point out this behaviour so that a very similar project on another wiki is aware of what they are letting themselves in for in allowing you to participate. Please, find a new hobby to occupy your time. Cmao20 (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, ignoring Commons users: it's time to analyze the image! ArionStar (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "guy from Commons", as you call me, made far more contributions than you in this section of Wikipedia. -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever, Basile from Commons… Whatever. ArionStar (talk) 00:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy Wikimedia Commons -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:42, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm confused, ArionStar. Sockpuppets aren't allowed on Wikipedia are they? Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SOCK. Moonreach (talk) 20:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: Just checked, but none of the sockpuppets mentioned above were ever active on the English Wikipedia. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regards ;-* ArionStar (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Armbrust: all pictures hosted on Commons are displayed here on Wikipedia in English (and other languages). Vandalized images make no exception. See for example the history of File:Buda de Ibiraçu (B&W).jpg, where you can verify it was vandalized during 6 days, before another user called Koavf reverts. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless @Armbrust:, I consider that all Wikis should abide by the same code of ethics; so a ban on Commons concerning featured images should surely be respected here; quite apart from the attacks on Basile which should not go unoticed by any Admin active here. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Answered a similar question at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kaaba 2. The same applies here too. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 05:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Took on an iPhone 15 Pro, who is DEFINITELY not at the standard of featured picture. Looking closely, this image is definitely not fit for being a featured picture due to all the quality issues, against what is described as “high quality”. Sorry, but another one of the lies from you Arion. Wcamp9 (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Article too small. Poor sources. Bad quality image of low resolution. -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are all right actually. RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Poor sources" doesn't mean "false". And the article in state is very small for a link on the home page. -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The main issue appears to be the photographer itself, and we need to Wikipedia:FOC. E_F⁵ 14:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I won't go into the merits, and I hope ArionStar calms down, but what Basile Morin said about vandalism is in bad faith and simply false. What vandalism?! The "lang-pt" template was replaced some time ago, so it's obvious that the previous version would be broken. In the diff in question, by the way, Arion only removed information that I, the article's creator, later confirmed to be indeed incorrect. RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Almost all of the few Featured Pictures ArionStar collected have been vandalized (1, 2, 3, 4, 5...) This is verifiable and some of these pictures were used in articles (concrete example, used in article "Papaye", the link is written below). This file here was used in the same article (a few weeks earlier in fact, before being replaced by this 2nd version, above), and given the considerable number of various abuses committed by the nominator, I warn that there is a strong chance that the same thing will happen again in the future if this image is promoted. See for example a "picture of the day" on frp-Wikipedia. There you go, now everyone must take their responsibilities. Kind regards. -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Basile. Yann (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) with calf Moorea 2.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 00:00:00 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. Illustrates article well with high EV. FP on Commons. I put it in the infobox but another user reverted my edit. I don’t like the current infobox image.
Articles in which this image appears: Humpback whale
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 18:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like the shot, but the lighting is just a little... bland. I get it was taken underwater, hence why I'm still supporting. E_F⁵ 17:36, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. An underwater photo of a 15m whale has to be taken some way away. The physics of light absorption mean that it is always going to look very flat (and blue) compared with underwater close-ups. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I get that. Amazing shot though, I think the mother-child duo carries high EV as you can see what that species looks like as a child and as an adult. E_F⁵ 14:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was amazed it struggled at Commons. It is one of my top 5 photos of all time. But it is difficult when so few people have ever peered through 20m of water. Or realise how HUGE it is.Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, you're right. Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. MER-C 19:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArionStar (talk) 04:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Makes sense to consider degree of difficulty for a shot like this. blameless 02:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 08:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) with calf Moorea 2.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:26, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blacktip reef shark

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 00:00:00 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image. High EV. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Blacktip reef shark
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my comment on Wikimedia Commons. -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 18:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not the best at evaluating underwater shots, but there's high wow factor, and I'm trusting the other voters for quality checks. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee ^talk 06:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Blacktip reef shark (Carcharhinus melanopterus) Moorea.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:21, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pacific orange leafwing

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2025 at 00:00:00 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. Adds EV to article.
Articles in which this image appears: Doleschallia
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 18:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 20:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Pacific orange leafwing (Doleschallia tongana vomana) underside Taveuni.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:17, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Marco at police station after Ship Cafe shooting

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2025 at 22:22:05 (UTC)

Reason: Documentary photo depicting the real-world origins of film noir's compelling black-and-white aesthetic and fairly clear evidence of recent violence of some nature; more specifically this image just stops me in my tracks every time I encounter it again; pretty sure it was never published by the Times but it was surfaced by UCLA archivists after the Times donated their photo morgue to UCLA and it has since been published in at least one history of the crime syndicates that ran Los Angeles during the Great Depression era
Articles in which this image appears: Albert Marco, Ship Cafe
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator: Unidentified Los Angeles Times photographer, digitized by UCLA Libraries, uploaded by User:Jengod

Support as nominator – jengod (talk) 22:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've started a restoration. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 03:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a fan of the old-time news business and/or archives I personally adore the hot mess of the name scratched into the negative in cursive and all the now-incomprehensible file numbers, but also I understand that photography and featured photos is its whole own thing. You are a star! I swear I didn't drop this here to trick you into cleaning it up. Albert Marco doesn't deserve you LOL. jengod (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Going to take a long time to clean up all those dark stains on his clothes. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 06:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
<3 <3 <3 jengod (talk) 12:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support restoration. Dang, that was hard. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 07:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wish more than anything the original photographer could see and enjoy your restoration! Thank you that was so thoughtfully done and generous. jengod (talk) 08:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support @Adam Cuerden: excellent as always. ArionStar (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Restoration –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 18:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ArionStar and VulcanSphere: It would be appreciated, if you would explicitly indicate which version you support. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Armbrust: Alright, Vulcan has amended the Support vote to Restoration. –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support restoration – Bammesk (talk) 16:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Restoration per Adam (the result was worth it!) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support restoration – Yann (talk) 10:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support restoration. MER-C 11:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support restoration – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support restoration — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Uclamss 1429 b3716 G3047 Marco Albori aka Albert Marco sitting in a stained pinstriped suit.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poor Cinderella

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2025 at 20:51:11 (UTC)

Original – Poor Cinderella, a 1934 cartoon short that depicted Betty Boop in color for the first time.

Reason: Excellent EV for its article; additionally, several stills extracted from the film have been used elsewhere to illustrate other things (such as Cinecolor, the bipack color process used in the short).
Articles in which this image appears: Poor Cinderella, Cinderella
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film
Creator: The Fleischer brothers, Paramount Pictures

Support as nominator – Moonreach (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support pending PD confirmation. Excellent quality, best Cinecolor print I've ever seen. --Janke | Talk 02:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The PD claim looks correct. The renewal would've had to happen in 1961/1962, and the Catalog of Copyright Entries has renewals from other Betty Boop films during that time, but not Poor Cinderella. hinnk (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 04:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 18:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The copyright review tag needs attention though. It has been there for 5 years. Suggest dropping a note at Commons:Help desk. Bammesk (talk) 16:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Hamid Hassani (talk) 03:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Betty Boop - Poor Cinderella (1934) - HD.webm --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:08, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suspended nominations

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