Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/2019

< Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates | delist

This is an archive page for featured picture status removal debates. These debates are closed and should not be edited. For more information see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

2006 - 2007 - 2008 - 2009 - 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015
2016 - 2017 - 2018 - 2019 - 2020 - 2021 - 2022 - 2023 - 2024

Retained

edit

Replace: Maddison Elliott

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2019 at 08:41:05 (UTC)

 
Maddison Elliott is an Australian swimmer
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
Chronologically superseded in its article - current FP was taken for 2012 Paralympics, proposed replacement was taken for 2016 Paralympics.
Articles this image appears in
Maddison Elliott
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Maddison Elliott
Nominator
MER-C

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Yellow-faced honeyeater

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2019 at 12:09:57 (UTC)

 
Yellow-faced Honeyeater (Caligavis chrysops)
Reason
Superseded by recently promoted FP File:Caligavis chrysops - Lake Parramatta Reserve.jpg. All usages replaced.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Yellow-faced Honeyeater nov08.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:29, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Pied kingfisher

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2019 at 14:48:41 (UTC)

 
A pied kingfisher
Reason
not used and not as good as images in article pied kingfisher
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pied Kingfisher
Nominator
Charlesjsharp (talk)
notifed photographer. --Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
yes, I was notified. Checking criteria for delisting, I don't mind if image becomes obsolete at some point: agree that something that was good at 2013 may become upgraded with better one at 2019 Artemy Voikhansky (talk) 08:22, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked on the reference desk about the subspecies and gender. The image was taken in Israel, and if this is C. r. syriacus then the image can be reinserted. MER-C 13:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have inserted the image in the English Wikipedia article with sex and subspecies identified MER-C Artemy Voikhansky Mattximus Bammesk. Still recommend delist as FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree - now that the primary motivation for delisting has been addressed, I don't think this image's use by date has been reached. MER-C 17:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Being a photographer behind the image, I'd refrain from expressing an opinion on the matter as I might be not as neutral as I'm expected to be. I'll leave this on the community. Artemy Voikhansky (talk) 18:49, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Image is now in a gallery. I think use in a gallery usually means not significant encyclopedic value, plus there is a FP in the infobox. On the other hand, this is the only depiction of that subspecies and the composition is a clear depiction of the full bird. I am neutral on this nom. Bammesk (talk)
A sidenote (my opinion) about nominating subspecies that appear only in a gallery: I see sufficient EV if the nom has at least 2 images (i.e. a set, of 2 subspecies), in which case the nom is an automatic depiction of subspecies variation; or if there is sufficient text in the article describing the particular (the nominated) subspecies. Bammesk (talk) 02:16, 26 February 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 16:55, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Common grass blue (1)

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2019 at 15:00:10 (UTC)

 
Common Grass Blue, Zizina labradus labradus, taken in Swifts Creek, Victoria
Reason
not up to current Fp standards
Articles this image appears in
Zizina labradus
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Common grass blue.jpg
Nominator
Charlesjsharp (talk)

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:14, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Common Grass-blue (2)

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2019 at 14:53:27 (UTC)

 
a suitable caption for the image
Reason
Not up to current FP standards
Articles this image appears in
links to the article(s) that use this image
Previous nomination/s
link(s) to the image's original FPC nomination, and any previous delist noms
Nominator
Charlesjsharp (talk)
Replacement is surely irrelevant if the images should not be FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:56, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That may be the case, but you'll find it a lot easier to delist FPs that have been superseded with better images (even if the newer images are not of FP standard). MER-C 13:12, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Per MER-C, "I prefer the other image" as well. Bammesk (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the other image's background, but this one has more pixels. Bammesk (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist - Not up to featured picture standards, blurry and obscured body especially. Mattximus (talk) 13:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Some process related notes. Sorry in advance for the long wall of text! As far as the nom reason "Not up to current FP standards": A) if by "current standards" a nominator means minimum pixel requirement, then the reason section should say so, and my reply would be: it is a good reason when we have a higher resolution replacement, otherwise it is not (on its own and automatically) a good reason, because the number of pixels is an agreed upon consensus aimed at incremental improvement over time, I don't think it makes sense to delist each and every previous FP just because an WP:RFC ups the pixel consensus. B) if by "current standards" a nominator means issues other than minimum pixel requirement, then a nominator should provide some hints in the nom reason, so each individual reviewer doesn't have to chase and guess it for themselves. Also, Charles, please fill out the nom fields above so each reviewer doesn't have to go through multiple clicks to see where/if the image is used in articles, and why it was supported or opposed in previous noms. Bammesk (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought I was doing the FP project a favour by delisting, but it's too time-consuming if one has to fill in lots of fields. Not up to current FP standards = quality standards, not size. For me, one click on the image should be enough to agree delist. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • About "it's too time-consuming", 5 votes means 4 reviewers have to go through the "time-consuming" steps, instead of just one nominator. I think that's why the fields are there. About nom reason: words like "focus", "saturation", etc. equals less time consumption for reviewers, and no time consumption for nominator (specially when the file is less than 1500px). Yes you are doing the project a favor, however, leaving volunteer reviewers in the dark and expecting them to do the footwork is a bad idea. Bammesk (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and Replace: Dali Atomicus

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2019 at 23:27:52 (UTC)

 
Current FP: Dali Atomicus
 
Proposed Replacement: Dali Atomicus
Reason
to be replaced by File:Salvador Dali A (Dali Atomicus) 09633u (retouched).jpg, file retouched
Articles this image appears in
Salvador Dalí, Philippe Halsman, Portal:Salvador Dalí
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dali Atomicus
Nominator
Yann (talk)
  • Not sure what the current conventions are, but I think it's easier for reviewers if you show both images as I've done now. Hope you don't mind Yann. Revert if you disagree or if I'm wrong. Also it's best if you tell people what the actual changes are, i.e., why do you think it's now better? You haven't given a solid reason - "retouched" is very vague and could mean anything. --jjron (talk) 07:53, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for adding the retouched version. I didn't do the retouch, so I don't know the details, but I have noticed this version. AFAICT some vertical lines were removed. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's been retouched to remove the strings that the frames are suspended from.
The better-known version of this artwork is a retouched version, presumably hand-retouched in 1948. Our copy is a scan of the original photo without the original retouching; this digital edit remakes some, but not all, of the changes in the better-known version. (Not changed: assistant's hands visible on the left; wooden support on steps; cropping; painting behind Dali. For me that makes this a bit of a weird compromise - it's neither the famous version, nor the original unedited photo. I'd suggest we keep the current version. TSP (talk) 12:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per conversation above. The strings that have been edited out are part of the photograph, not damage. It's true that the better-known version of this lacks the strings, but the other differences from the better-known version remain, which makes this an odd compromise that I think is less encyclopedic than the original photo. Arguably also a violation of FP criterion 8. TSP (talk) 12:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdrawn OK, fine. --Yann (talk) 09:57, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:57, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and Replace: Lansdowne Herakles

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2019 at 23:19:29 (UTC)

 
Current FP: Lansdowne Herakles
 
Proposed Replacement: Lansdowne Herakles
Reason
to be replaced by File:Lansdowne Herakles Getty Museum (retouched).jpg, background noise reduced
Articles this image appears in
Lansdowne Heracles
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lansdowne Heracles
Nominator
Yann (talk)
  • Delist and replace — Yann (talk) 23:19, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep current — blurring and 'glow' at the statue's edges. I don't particularly see the need to have less noise on the background than on the main subject; I don't object to it, but it isn't worth the cost of even the slightest negative impact on the main subject. TSP (talk) 12:31, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist and replace – It's an improvement. Edge glow is hardly noticeable at full size (it's confined to 2 pixels in head and shoulder area), there is no edge blurring. The noise improvement is very noticeable. Bammesk (talk) 15:57, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace. I abstained from supporting the nomination, but seeing that the noise is fixed I should support. MER-C 15:32, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and replace: Earthrise

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2019 at 06:37:40 (UTC)

 
Earthrise
 
Replace by Earthsound's edited version.
Reason
Replacing with correct flaws inherent in the scan and and to improve upon the digital manipulation NASA released many years ago.
Articles this image appears in
Earthrise, etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/NASA-Apollo8-Dec24-Earthrise.jpg
Nominator
The NMI User (talk)
  • Delist and replace — The NMI User (talk) 06:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – The color correction on Earth looks appropriate but @Earthsound: can you speak to the color changes in the Moon? Did you go back to the film original source or correct the NASA version? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:59, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – All versions I've seen printed on paper have had a brownish tint to the moon. OTOH, the astronauts described the surface as grey. Now, in the candidate the moon is slightly bueish (~5-10 higher in B channel), and there is even a slight cyan cast in some of the craters (R channel ~10 lower than G abd B), carried over from the original. How can we know what's right? (Looking at the moon from earth won't help much due to atmospheric filtration...) --Janke | Talk 09:39, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – There are few print issues that don't exist on, or were removed from, the NASA version, mostly visible on the moon's surface - the most obvious are a long mark on the rightmost crater, and a few blotches to the right of the pair of craters to the right of this - I wonder if these could be addressed? I'm also feeling instinctively a little uncomfortable about featuring an image that differs so much in coloration from the official published NASA versions - are there WP:OR issues?— Preceding unsigned comment added by TSP (talk • contribs) 12:28, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 06:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delist: Helsinki Lutheran Cathedral

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jul 2019 at 14:19:41 (UTC)

 
The Helsinki Cathedral
Reason
Superceded by recently promoted FP File:Helsinki July 2013-27a.jpg.
Articles this image appears in
minor usage in List of cathedrals in Finland, will be replaced if consensus is to delist
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Helsinki Lutheran Cathedral
Nominator
MER-C
  • Delist — MER-C 14:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment given the angle makes the church's shape a lot easier to figure out - how far the portico extends, etc - I'm not so sure we should be too quick to shout "supersedes" instead of "complements" Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 14:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist - it is almost identical to the recently promoted image, it does not provide almost any new EV to have a slightly different angle. Should every building have a featured image taken from the front, then a few steps to the left? Mattximus (talk) 15:13, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is nearer a 45° angle, and shows the structure of the building much more clearly in my eyes. The Greek Cross shape is basically impossible to make out from the new FP as there's no depth. Perhaps both shouldn't be FPs, but the rush to remove this from articles seems a mistake. In fact, the new FP is super misleading - although in an unavoidable way - as to the overall shape as it makes the nearest side look very different from the entrances left and right, as the roof can't be seen from the low angle. Oppose Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 15:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – I am leaning to delist, two things can be better, the deep blue sky doesn't look natural, for a 45 degree angled shot the shadows lean into the view rather than lean away (a photo from the other side or a better time of day can fix this). About not removing this photo from article(s), I agree, it is informative and shows another dimension. But we can just delist it. Bammesk (talk) 03:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC) . . . Delist – Bammesk (talk) 03:56, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Adam Cuerden; comparing this with the front-on view, this is the much better of the two. It allows a good portion of the left-side of the cathedral to be viewed, and the new image is over-bright in the whites. Delist the other one, and keep this one.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:42, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Per Adam & considering WP:NOTPAPER. --Janke | Talk 14:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Per above, and because this has less people and shows the bottom of the columns a bit more. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 13:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Dahlia hybrid

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2019 at 14:21:04 (UTC)

 
Original – An unknown Dahlia cultivar
Reason
Not used in any articles. It's a hybrid and the cultivar and location are not specified - which is just as bad for EV as if the species weren't identified. Plus Dahlia has enough images already.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Dahlia x hybrida.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:43, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Replaced

edit

Delist and Replace: Kew Gardens Alpine House

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2019 at 19:28:20 (UTC)

 
Original
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
My original was delisted at Commons a couple of months ago after it was discovered that the deciding !vote in the original nomination three years ago had been cast by a sock of a now-banned user. I was given the option of renominating, but chose instead to reprocess the image taking advantage of what I have learned since the original nomination, resulting in one with more muted highlights on the clouds and the building, easier on the eyes I think. It passed with more support than the original nomination.

So, I have decided that a delist and replace here is warranted as well.

I am the creator and uploader in both situations; I have notified the original nominator here although he has not edited since mid-2016.

Articles this image appears in
Kew Gardens
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Alpine House, Kew Gardens
Nominator
Daniel Case (talk)

Replaced with File:Alpine House, Kew Gardens, 2018 edit.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:30, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delist and Replace: Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2019 at 08:37:52 (UTC)

 
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
 
To be replaced by this version, larger crop and better
Reason
To be replaced by File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, larger - edit1.jpg, larger crop and better. Better to have the image as close as possible to the original picture for such an iconic image.
Articles this image appears in
already replaced
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, 2
Nominator
Yann (talk)

Replaced with File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, larger - edit1.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 08:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and Replace: Apollo 11

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 15:10:34 (UTC)

 
Current featured picture – Astronaut Buzz Aldrin, lunar module pilot, stands on the surface of the moon near the leg of the lunar module, Eagle, during the Apollo 11 moonwalk.
 
Replacement photo. This is the original composition of the photo taken by Neil Armstrong. The original film exposure can be found at NASA's image database
Reason
To be replaced by File:Aldrin Apollo 11 original.jpg. The current FP was promoted in 2005 when this alternative was not available, I believe. It also fails WP:FP? #8 (bullet 4): "Any manipulation which causes the main subject to be misrepresented is unacceptable. (See: Moon landing conspiracy theories#Photographic and film oddities) It is also of lower resolution. There was a previous discussion to delist where it was kept in 2013.
The current FP currently appears in 2 pages in the article namespace compared to the 18 pages it appeared in 2013.
The replacement is currently in 25 articles.
Articles this image appears in
Current FP appears at: Dark Side of the Moon (mockumentary) and Moon landing conspiracy theories. (I believe this version of photo is relevant to these pages.)

Newer version appears at: Buzz Aldrin, Apollo 11, Moon landing conspiracy theories, Colonization of Mars, Extravehicular activity, History of spaceflight, History of the United States, History of the United States (1964–1980), July 1969, List of spaceflight records, Space exploration, etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Aldrin Apollo 11.jpg, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Apollo 11 Photograph of Buzz Aldrin, and Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aldrin Apollo 11 original
Nominator
--- Coffeeandcrumbs

Replaced with File:Aldrin Apollo 11 original.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:02, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Replace: Oedipus and the Sphinx

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 09:41:15 (UTC)

 
Oedipus and the Sphinx
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
Superseded by official museum reproduction. While the pixel count is smaller, the level of detail is about the same and the colors are now authoritative.
Articles this image appears in
Oedipus and the Sphinx etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/On the Island of Dr Moreau
Nominator
MER-C

Replaced with File:Oedipus and the Sphinx MET DP-14201-023.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and Replace: We Can Do It

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2019 at 09:37:46 (UTC)

 
We Can Do It!
 
To be replaced by this version
 
Alt 1 Restored version
 
Alt 2 More extensive restoration
Reason
to be replaced by File:We Can Do It! NARA 535413.jpg
Articles this image appears in
We Can Do It!, History of women in the United States, History of feminism, Rosie the Riveter, Female roles in the World Wars, Home front, J. Howard Miller, Geraldine Doyle, Precarious work, etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Rosie the Riveter Reloaded
Nominator
Yann (talk)
  • That's true for paintings. I'm not so sure that's true for mass-produced prints, where we should be providing an idealised copy. The big crack on the right, for instance, is not part of the encyclopedic value. I'm afraid I started on a restoration when you hadn't said anything for a day, and have... basically finished it before seeing this, so... sorry for stepping on toes. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 21:05, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It can be difficult to distinguish oversaturated because the original poster was oversaturated from oversaturated because somebody boosted it later. But in this case I think we should take the colors from the official government scan (as used in these restorations) as definitive. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced with File:We Can Do It! NARA 535413 - Restoration 2.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:55, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and Replace: Woman Suffrage Procession

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 05:02:47 (UTC)

 
Original: To be replaced I did my best with a fairly bad source, which included damage to the leftmost woman's shoulder, which I almost got right when I fixed it.
 
Suggested replacement: Re-restored from alternate source. Not as saturated, but it's probably more accurate. Shoulder is as it was originally.
Reason
Improved source allowed the fixing of errors in the original restoration.
Articles this image appears in
Quite a few, including Woman suffrage parade of 1913, Women's suffrage, National American Woman Suffrage Association, etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Women's Suffrage
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.9% of all FPs

Replaced with File:Official Program Woman Suffrage Procession - March 3, 1913.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delist and Replace: Jules Verne

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 19:06:02 (UTC)

Reason
I... was honestly surprised to see this was an FP. The restoration of the current FP is competent enough, but the original is a very, very poor reproduction, and is very overexposed. The jacket on the current FP almost looks drawn, due to the level of detail in it. The Carjat is, I think, much better. I haven't done any replacement in articles, because I felt I should let the votes come in first.
Articles this image appears in
Jules Verne +10
Previous nomination
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Jules Verne
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7% of all FPs

Replaced with File:Jules Verne by Étienne Carjat.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:28, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delisted

edit

Replace: QR Code

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2019 at 03:40:48 (UTC)

 
Structure of a QR code, highlighting functional elements
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
Replaced in article due to a factual error.
Articles this image appears in
QR code
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/QR Code Structure
Nominator
MER-C
  • (1) It's used at a width of 400px in the article. (2) I'll quote from the talk page of the current FP: "Since this is a version 4 (33x33) QR symbol, it doesn't actually contain version information. That is present only in version 7 (45x45) and larger symbols. If version information were present, the two blue blocks would contain the same pattern of dark and light (but rotated 90 degrees)." The replacement image shows a v7 QR code. MER-C 03:56, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I'm afraids I can't support a replace, because it's misleading as to the structure of the more common ones as it shows information not present in them, and can't support keeping the original, because it's inaccurate. I can only support fixing the original and turning this into a set, or neither being featured. Delist Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 04:47, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 03:41, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Trepanation and pirates

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2019 at 07:51:55 (UTC)

 
Illustration supposedly of trepanation
 
Allegedly a picture of pirates, but impossible to tell
Reason
I'm nominating these together, as I think the problems, while somewhat distinct, are similar enough. Neither are used; the Trepanation one has doubts as to whether it's really showing trepanation; and the pirate image just doesn't thumbnail, at all. They're all FPCs that simply failed to thrive: good enough to get to FPC, but the problems meant they left their articles thereafter. Also, as the person who restored, and, I believe, nominated them all (some under Shoemaker's Holiday, my erstwhile pseudonym), I think that I'm uniquely placed to ask this: Remove my FP credits for these.
Articles this image appears in
None.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Peter Treveris - engraving of Trepanation for Handywarke of surgeri 1525, and Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pirates relaxing.
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs

Delisted File:Peter Treveris - engraving of Trepanation for Handywarke of surgeri 1525.png --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted File:Pyle pirate relaxing b.png --Armbrust The Homunculus 07:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist or replace: Voyager 1 and 2

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2019 at 17:45:37 (UTC)

 
Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 with respect to the heliosphere
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
Chronologically obsolete, 2005 FP, not used in any articles. I've put up the most recent version of this image as a replacement, but I'm not too fussed if this gets delisted outright - the new image comes up short in a number of aspects.
Articles this image appears in
None. Replacement: Heliosphere, Voyager program
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Voyager 1 entering heliosheath region
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:54, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Sooty oystercatcher

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2019 at 15:15:01 (UTC)

 
A sooty oystercatcher
Reason
Carries similar information to recently promoted and higher resolution FP File:Haematopus fuliginosus - Doughboy Head.jpg. The new FP displaced this image in Sooty oystercatcher, so this one is effectively superceded. Minor usages haven't been replaced yet but will do so on delisting.
Articles this image appears in
(minor usages, may be replaced)
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Haematopus fuliginosus Bruny.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist or replace: Sarracenia

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Feb 2019 at 20:32:42 (UTC)

 
Cutaway view of a Sarracenia flower
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
Unused JPEG diagram, 2006 FP, dumb file name. I've put up the SVG version as a replacement, but I believe it falls short of current FP standards - in particular, the use of raster images makes the S in SVG rather pointless.
Articles this image appears in
None. Replacement: Sarracenia.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sarracenia flower
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:37, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Naqsh-e Rustam

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Feb 2019 at 18:17:09 (UTC)

 
A panoramic view of Naqsh-e Rustam
 
Not for delisting: the recently promoted FP
Reason
Contains less information (i.e. a narrower FOV) than fairly recently promoted FP File:Naghsh-e rostam, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 20-24 PAN.jpg and is of lower resolution. Old FP was displaced three years ago.
Articles this image appears in
(minor usages, will be replaced on delisting)
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/20101229 Naqsh e Rostam Shiraz Iran more Panoramic.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:21, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Female hardhead

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2019 at 19:13:34 (UTC)

 
A female hardhead duck
Reason
Contains very similar information to just-promoted FP File:Aythya australis female - Hurstville Golf Course.jpg. The new FP displaced the old FP in the article, and is of higher reolution.
Articles this image appears in
minor usages, will be replaced when delisting is likely
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Female Hardhead duck.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:19, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Lime Butterfly

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2019 at 14:46:06 (UTC)

 
Lime Butterfly Papilio demoleus, Bangalore, India
Reason
not as good as other image mentioned on talk page File:Common Lime Butterfly Papilio demoleus by Kadavoor.JPG
Articles this image appears in
none
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Lime Butterfly Papilio demoleus.jpg
Nominator
Charlesjsharp (talk)

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 16:47, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delist: Zabriskie Point

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2019 at 19:20:54 (UTC)

 
A panoramic view of Zabriskie Point
Reason
Booted out of its article 10 years ago, unused, superseded by higher resolution Commons FP File:Zbriskie Point South Panorama 2012.jpg. See companion nomination Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Zbriskie Point.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Zabriskie Point Panorama
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Crepsular rays

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2019 at 20:18:19 (UTC)

 
Crepsular rays poking out from behind a cloud
Reason
Unused, low resolution. For such a photogenic phenomenon, we should demand a higher standard and/or unusual image.
Articles this image appears in
The empty set.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Crepuscular rays color.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:58, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Zabriskie Point (2)

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2019 at 20:06:22 (UTC)

 
A second panorama from Zabriskie Point
Reason
Another unused FP of this subject, this one booted out a mere 9.75 years ago. Superseded by File:Zbriskie Point South Panorama 2012.jpg.
Articles this image appears in
The empty set.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Zabriskie Point
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Matterhorn

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 09:39:26 (UTC)

 
Matterhorn (4,478 m, Walliser Alps, East side) mirrored in Riffelsee, photograph taken from shore of lake Riffelsee.
Reason
Unused, possibly oversaturated, not up to modern standards re: landscapes - in particular noticeable posterisation/JPEG artifacts in the sky.
Articles this image appears in
Zippo
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Matterhorn Riffelsee 2005-06-11 crop.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Unidentified Papilio larva and Crepidinae sp. flower

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2019 at 15:37:03 (UTC)

 
A Papilio genus caterpillar, promoted under the belief it was Papilio demodocus
 
a Crepidinae sp. flower, originally promoted as Taraxacum officinale
Reason
Per commons:File talk:Unidentified Papilio larva Stratford Butterfly Farm (1).jpg there are substantial doubts as to the identity of this caterpillar, hence why it is no longer used in any articles. The Crepidinae sp. was originally identified as Taraxacum officinale, this has also been disputed. Both are beautifully shot, but the lack of accepted identification screws them over.
Articles this image appears in
N/A
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Papilio demodocus larva Stratford Butterfly Farm (1).jpg and Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Taraxacum officinale
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs

Delisted both images. --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:51, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delist: Probably-not Caligo eurilochus

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2019 at 00:57:34 (UTC)

 
Passed as Caligo eurilochus, probably actually some species of Eryphanis.
Reason
Similar to the below (and I wish I had included it there), but with a very confusing edit history - it looks like a copy-move - this is another image where it was thought to be one thing, this is disputed, crap, oh well, not really useable now. Again, an excellent image let down by documentation.
Articles this image appears in
N/A
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Caligo eurilochus 3 Richard Bartz.jpg
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Homoneura

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2019 at 17:31:10 (UTC)

 
A pair of unidentified insects mating.
Reason
Species unidentified, not used in any articles. Furthermore there is a comment on the talk page that the genus could also be wrong - "This is not Homoneura, these could be Peplomyza - but you would need a pinned specimen to be sure".
Articles this image appears in
Void
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Homoneura sp.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Camponotus

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 09:04:36 (UTC)

 
An unidentified ant
Reason
Unidentified and not used in any articles.
Articles this image appears in
Nada
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Camponotus sp. ant.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:15, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Armenian Genocide

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 May 2019 at 10:35:13 (UTC)

 
Armenian Genocide map
Reason
See the discussion here. There are numerous issues relating to the clarity of this map, and the fact that the key doesn't seem complete. Some of these issues were also raised at the original FPC and weren't really resolved, so I think it's dubious if this should have even been promoted in the first place.
Articles this image appears in
Armenian Genocide, Western Armenia
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Armenian_Genocide
Nominator
 — Amakuru (talk)

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:35, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Mycena

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 May 2019 at 17:04:53 (UTC)

 
Either Mycena kuurkacea or Mycena toyerlaricola
Reason
Species not identified and not used in any articles.
Articles this image appears in
N/A
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Mycena sp.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:50, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Bufonaria perelegans

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 15:41:26 (UTC)

 
The shell of Bufonaria perelegans.
Reason
Not used in any articles because it has been replaced by a higher resolution image that contains more information. (The replacement isn't quite up to FP standards - it was a little overexposed, the edit made it worse to the point of blown highlights.)
Articles this image appears in
None.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bufonaria perelegans
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:10, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Grapsus grapsus

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 14:47:58 (UTC)

 
Grapsus grapsus
Reason
To be replaced by File:Zayapa (Grapsus grapsus), Las Bachas, isla Santa Cruz, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-23, DD 30.jpg (see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Grapsus grapsus). This image is no longer used in the animal article.
Articles this image appears in
Minor usages, will be replaced if the other image is successful
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Red rock crab
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 16:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Delist: Unidentified newborn bat.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 20:26:24 (UTC)

 
A neonate of an insectivorous microbat, surely, not a frugivorous megabat
Reason
This is clearly misidentified. Copying from my post on the Commons file talk page, This article states that newborns of this species weigh ca. 11g at birth. Little brown bats, for example, weigh 5.5–12.5 g as adults. Look at the size of an adult little brown bat relative to the human hand, though [2]. They're small, but definitely not small enough to sit on a fingertip. This is definitely a wrong identification. I believe this image thus fails 5 and 6 of the Featured picture criteria. We may never know the real ID of this bat neonate, giving this image limited encyclopedic value.
Articles this image appears in
none anymore
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lesser short-nosed fruit bat
Nominator
Enwebb (talk)
Cynopterus sphinx is a species of megabat as it is in the family Pteropodidae. Not only is this neonate clearly of a different family based on size, let alone the same genus and species, but it is clearly a different family because it has a tragus clearly visible in the photograph. Bats in Pteropodidae do not have tragi [3]. No, I don't know what this bat species is (which makes two of us). I know with certainty that it is not this species though, which is enough to say that it shouldn't be a FP. Enwebb (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you talk about Cynopterus sphinx. It is Lesser short-nosed fruit bat and it has tragus. If you reject the ID, give correct one with reference. I photographed with context awareness and I know what are the spices were there. I have given the geo location too. You just oppose without valid reason. --AntanO 03:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the incorrect scientific name. You are correct, it is labeled as Cynopterus brachyotis. No, that species doesn't have a tragus. It is a megabat and megabats do not have tragi. I provided a reference above. My reason for oppposing (and everyone else's) is that you have incorrectly identified this bat species. Bats are generally identified using an adult specimen in hand with a dichotomous key. Measurements such as forearm length, greatest length of skull, weight, hind foot length, ear length, and echolocation characteristics are all used. I will not be making a positive ID of this species and I shouldn't have to, because I'm not the one who uploaded it to Commons. It's not my job to fix your ID. As someone who spends many hours working on bat articles, however, I am taking these steps because your erroneous ID is harming public knowledge. Enwebb (talk) 03:15, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First link given is for Greater short-nosed fruit bat, and second link for Little brown bat which is 5.5–12.5 g (as adults). But, I named it for Lesser short-nosed fruit bat which is 21 - 32 g / 30 - 100 g (as adults). Therefore, newborn can sit on finger. Also, Lesser short-nosed fruit bat has tragi/ear, and you can see it. You said Pteropodidae do not have tragi. What is that ear-shaped portion? Have you ever seen newborn of Lesser short-nosed fruit bat? You just referring from book knowledge. But, I have seen and photographed where Lesser short-nosed fruit bats come to eat fruits. There is no Greater short-nosed fruit bat or Little brown bat (which is not in Sri Lanka). A few were trapped at a house when they changed flight and gave birth. There was 99% change for Lesser short-nosed fruit bat unless 1% change for microbat which infiltrated to that house! --AntanO 17:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The pinna are the external ears. Megabats have ears/pinna. The tragi are cartilage flaps in front of the ear opening. Megabats don't have tragi. The bat pictured has a tragus in front of its ear. Therefore it cannot be the species you say it is (nor any bat in that family). Enwebb (talk) 18:45, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You can't conclude from a baby bat. It is common. Also, it has similarity ears like adult of its spices. --AntanO 03:16, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist - on enwiki's FPC process, it's important to get the species right (and it should be used in articles). Ideally, when we find a misidentification, we would also find the correct identification, but it sounds like that's an exceedingly difficult task by photo alone. Unless someone else can provide an alternative, we should thus delist. Commons FP status is less of a problem, though. Misidentification isn't good, but I don't know how willing people would be to delist just on that basis... — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist. Not in use, not clearly identified. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:25, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Australian Pelican

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2019 at 10:32:41 (UTC)

 
An Australian Pelican.
Reason
Not used in any articles. File:Pelecanus conspicillatus - Doughboy Head.jpg is a better image.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pelican lakes entrance02.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:52, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Replace: Allotropes of carbon

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2019 at 18:31:20 (UTC)

 
Eight allotropes of carbon
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
Replaced by SVG. Even so, not too fussed if this gets delisted - I think this diagram is not complex enough to be FP and the SVG replacement could have better presentation, particularly representing the carbon atoms with dots (as seen in the current FP).
Articles this image appears in
Allotropes of carbon, Carbon, Nonmetal
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Six Allotropes of Carbon
Nominator
MER-C
  • Delist or replace — MER-C 18:31, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. In theory I'm a big fan of replacing png by svg when possible. In practice, in this instance, I'm not sure about the quality of the replacement. In the png version, we have a classic ball-and-stick visualization of the molecules, with atoms represented as small balls and bonds represented as cylinders with visible thickness. Both are shaded, differently, to indicate their three-dimensional nature. Additionally, farther-away objects are shown in proper perspective (with smaller-looking balls and thinner-looking cylinders), making the depth of each object in each diagram clear. In the svg version, all we have is featureless line segments where the sticks were, no balls, and no easy way to see which objects are supposed to be closer and which farther. So I think some significant quality is lost. On the other hand, if we're going to use the svg in our articles going forward instead of the png, we can't continue to list the png as featured. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:14, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with this sentiment entirely. I've informed the author of the SVG version so that they can make these improvements. MER-C 16:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Delist, no replace. As it is both images are unsuitable (png: wrong format, unused in article space; svg: inadequate quality compared to png). —David Eppstein (talk) 07:40, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Bush cockroach

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2019 at 11:11:30 (UTC)

 
An unidentified cockroach
Reason
Species not identified, not used in any articles.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bush Cockroach.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:29, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Bryce Canyon

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2019 at 10:41:56 (UTC)

 
A panorama of the Bryce Canyon Amphitheater in Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah.
Reason
Not used in any articles - this is one of those subjects that chews through FPs. File:Inspiration Point Bryce Canyon November 2018 panorama.jpg and File:Bryce Amphitheater from Sunrise Point Highres 2013.jpg cover this subject and meet modern FP standards.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bryce Canyon Amphitheater Hoodoos Panorama.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Dragonfly compound eyes

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2019 at 15:01:14 (UTC)

 
An unidentified dragonfly.
Reason
Species not identified, not used in any articles. This is a bit of a shame, though - the photo would have excellent EV otherwise, and a modern replacement would easily be FP.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dragonfly compound eyes02.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Chrysopilus Snipe fly

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2019 at 16:48:20 (UTC)

 
A female snipe fly of genus, Chrysopilus
Reason
Species not identified, not used in any articles.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Chrysopilus Snipe fly.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Eastern yellow robin (Victoria, Australia 2008).jpg

Delist: Stereogram

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2019 at 10:47:36 (UTC)

 
Asiatic hybrid lilium stereogram. To view the image diverge your eyes until four images appear, then allow the image to converge to a set of three, focusing on the centre image.
 
Not for delisting: the recently promoted FP
Reason
Not used in any articles. Recently promoted FP File:Passiflora caerulea STEREO (R-L) 2019-06-27.jpg is functionally equivalent.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Asiatic hybrid lillium stereogram.jpg
Nominator
MER-C

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:10, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: Lugano

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2019 at 01:49:02 (UTC)

 
One of Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorskii's very early colour photos.
 
Alt 2 - see text
Reason
The image that was promoted, [4], shows that with careful colour balancing to match the original filters, this image can be extremely gorgeous. It was overwritten with a vastly inferior copy, however, so it's no wonder it's left articles again. The three original plates are available, and it may well interest someone to attempt to redo the work at high-quality, but this... is not that. I don't think Gorski used the exact modern Cyan-yellow-magenta colours - or, if he did, they need a little tweaking as to intensity - and it shows. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 01:49, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
none.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lugano in 1909
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs
  • Delist — Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.2% of all FPs 01:49, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why delist, when it is easy to fix - Alt 2 is just an example, can be done even better - if someone (hint, hint) spends a little more than my 45 seconds at the RGB level sliders... --Janke | Talk 07:13, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist — Not that easy to fix, I don't think? As well as the colour balance issues, there's substantial colour banding (made more obvious in the alt) and lots of damage; I think it would need to go back to the original plates. I don't think that, in this state, it's one of Prokudin-Gorsky's best - compare his photo of the Monastery of St Nil for example. TSP (talk) 12:33, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist – The ideal solution is to restore the three plates individually and recompose the color photograph. That is way beyond my skill level. Hopefully someone will. Either way the result is delisting as this file should remain as is and the new restoration would be a new file. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:37, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not so sure about restoring individually, exactly. You'd want to have them as three layers while restoring them, so you could pixel-perfect match outlines and shapes. because even an outline being shifted just one pixel off would make for ugly haloing. Restoration generally isn't nearly that exact on unimportant details (E.g. if there's a blob over a patch of blurry grass, you'd just healing brush some blurry grass from elsewhere - but that would lead to colour craziness if it was only one layer in an RGB set, because it probably wouldn't match the grass in that area on the other layers), but would need to be here. Only thing worse than that is both halves of a stereoscopic image, where no mainstream image program will let you properly view the image in order to match properly. There's a reason we've only ever featured half of any historical stereoscope shot. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 09:50, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist per above. The original FP falls way short of modern resolution requirements, so reverting the new upload will not address the reasons for delisting. MER-C 17:56, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist per disuse and current lack of an adequate-quality replacement. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:20, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist per others. Geoffroi 05:21, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 01:49, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Other

edit

Delist: Parts of the "Early Flight" set

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2019 at 22:54:25 (UTC)

Reason
Quite simply, they aren't used in articles, and, offhand, I don't see any particularly good place where they could be used: the first two are random collections of images, and the third doesn't have a clear message. The last one might be salvageable. Original nomination was kind of weird, but it was from back in 2007. That said, this was a 22-item set, so that (apparently) 18 images are stable and in use is impressive. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs 23:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Early flight 02562u.jpg
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs
Sorry but we don't "have much better photographs of those" - these images show the pioneers, and photography wasn't yet invented at the time of these balloons / balloonists !!! ;-) --Janke | Talk 19:24, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept File:Early_flight_02561u.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kept File:Early flight 02562u.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted File:Early flight 02562u (1).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted File:Early flight 02561u (8).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist and Replace: Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2019 at 11:15:49 (UTC)

 
Original
 
Proposed replacement
Reason
The picture used on the subject's article was changed in 2016, for the current version which has brighter looking blues. The proposed replacement was uploaded by Pimbrils with the comment "Better version frorm [5], with slight color adjustment". I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other, so will leave it to the community to assess which one is better, and we can retain that as FP and use it in all the affected articles. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Articles the original image appears in
History of painting · Self-portrait · Western painting · Women artists · Women letter writers
Articles the proposed replacement appears in
Portrait of Susanna Lunden · Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Elisabeth-Louise Vigée-Lebrun
Nominator
 — Amakuru (talk)

Revert to original (Which was already done by Adam Cuerden) --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:14, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Delist: A miscellany

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2019 at 09:32:25 (UTC)

N.B. I know this is big, but I'd suggest we just run this as "Does anyone think these are good enough to put these in articles?", since they auto-delist if not in use. This is to help the cleanup on WT:FPC.

  •  
    A house sparrow
  •  
    Robberflies mating
  •  
    Motocross racing
  •  
    Ulysses butterfly
  •  
    White peach
  •  
    Mammatus cloud panorama
  •  
    Giraffe head
  •  
    Jacky winter
Reason
Combined because of similar reasoning. All are unused images by Fir0002. For ca. 2006, they're quite good, but they're A. unused in articles. B. Kind of low resolution by modern standards, and C. That GDFL/CC-NC cross that, while I don't really want to delist over as a sole reason as I understand the motivation, would never pass nowadays. With all three of these the case, we may as well delist. Fir left in 2013, and hasn't been on except to update the contact information on his user page since.
Articles this image appears in
None.
Previous nomination/s
Nominator
Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.1% of all FPs

To simplify things for Armbrust, here are the ones unused, as of right now: Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 04:34, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted File:Sparrow on ledge.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted File:Common brown robberflies mating.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted File:MotoX racing03 edit.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kept File:Ulysses Butterfly - melbourne zoo.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kept File:White peach and cross section edit.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kept File:Mammatus cloud panorama.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted File:Giraffe08 - melbourne zoo edit.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kept File:Jacky winter nesting.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/2019&oldid=1036873554"