Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcut: COM:VIC

Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations Skip to set nominations

These are the candidates to become valued images. Please note that this is not the same as featured pictures or quality images. If you simply want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at photography critiques.

Single images can be proposed for valued image (VI) status. Candidates must be proposed as being the most valuable of all Commons' images within a specified scope. Judging is carried out according to the valued image criteria.

A Most Valued Review (MVR) is opened where there are two or more candidates competing within essentially the same scope.

The rules for promotion can be found at Commons:Valued image candidates/Promotion rules.

An image which has previously been declined can be renominated within the same scope only if the issues leading to the original decline have been addressed. Previously nominated images that were closed as "undecided" can be renominated at any time. Once a candidate achieves VI or VIS status it can normally be demoted only if some better candidate replaces it during an MVR.

If you would like to nominate an image for VI status, please do so following the instructions below. If you are proposing a better candidate within essentially the same scope as an image which already has VI status, please open an MVR.

How to nominate an image for VI status[edit]

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination.

Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image)[edit]

Step 1: Copy the image name into this box (excluding the File: prefix), at the end of the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Valued image candidates/My-image-filename.jpg. Then click on the "Create new nomination" button.


Step 2: Follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save the resulting VIC subpage.

Step 3: Manually add the candidate image towards the end of Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list (under the heading "New valued image nominations"), as the last parameter in the VICs template. Click here, and append the following line as the last parameter of the relevant section:

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this: 

{{VICs
 ...
 |My-image-filename.jpg
}}

and save the candidate list.

Renomination[edit]

Declined VICs can be renominated by any registered user, but only after one or more of the root cause(s) leading to a decline has/have been addressed. Undecided VICs can be renominated as is although it is still recommended to consider and fix issue(s) which may have hindered a promotion of the candidate in the previous review.

Besides fixing issues with the previous nomination the following procedure shall be followed upon renomination.

Step 1: Edit the candidate subpage you intend to renominate. All declined and undecided VICs are placed in either Category:Declined valued image candidates, or Category:Undecided valued image candidates and sorted by the date of the previous nomination.

Step 2: Replace the previous nomination date and time by pasting in 

|date={{subst:VI-time}}

Step 3: Replace the "undecided" or "declined" status with "nominated" (or "discussed" if you intend to add it to a Most Valued Review).

Step 4: If the previous nominator was a different user replace the nominator parameter with 

|nominator=~~~

Step 5: If the candidate does not already have an archive link to previous reviews: Create one using the following procedure.

  • Cut the text in the previous review section (leave the closing braces "}}")
  • replace the review parameter with
|review=
{{subst:VIC-archive}}
}}
  • Save the page.
  • There is now a red link to Previous reviews. Click the link to create the archive subpage and paste in the previous reviews.
  • Save the previous reviews archive page

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued Review[edit]

There must be at least two candidates competing within essentially the same scope to open an MVR. Each needs its own VIC subpage, which should be created as above if it does not already exist, but with status set to "discussed". Then, add the following section at the end of the page Commons:Valued image candidates/Most valued review candidate list: 

=== Scope ===
{{VICs
  |candidate1.jpg
  |candidate2.jpg
}}

where Scope is the scope of both images, and candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

If one of the candidates is an existing VI within essentially the same scope, the original VIC subpage is re-opened for voting by changing its status to status=discussed and new reviews are appended to the original VIC subpage. However, any original votes are not counted within the MVR.

The status parameter of each candidate should remain set to "discussed" while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidates[edit]

How to review an image[edit]

Any registered user can review the valued image candidates. Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it).

Nominations should be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those and the page on scope carefully before reviewing. Reviewing here is a serious business, and a reviewer who just breezes by to say "I like it!" is not adding anything of value. You need to spend the time to check the nomination against every one of the six VI criteria, and you also need to carry out searches to satisfy yourself on the "most valuable" criterion.

Review procedure[edit]

  • On the review page the image is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
  • Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
  • Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
  • Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
    • If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
    • If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
  • Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:
You type You get When
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ You have information.
*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~
  •  Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Example
 You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~
  •  Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Example
 You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~ You have a question.
*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~
  •  Support Reason for supporting. -- Example
 You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.
  • If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.
  • Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.
How to update the status
  • Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
    • status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
    • status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
    • status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
    • status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).


Remember the criteria: 1. Most valuable 2. Suitable scope 3. Illustrates well 4. Fully described 5. Geocoded 6. Well categorized.

Changes in scope during the review period[edit]

The nominator is allowed to make changes in scope as the review proceeds, for example in response to reviewer votes or comments. Whenever a scope is changed the nominator should post a signed comment at the bottom of the review area using {{VIC-scope-change|old scope|new scope|--~~~~}}, and should also leave a note on the talk page of all existing voters asking them to reconsider their vote. A support vote made before the change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn.

You can submit new nominations starting on COM:VIC.

Pending valued image candidates[edit]

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache
55,216 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
 49,639 (89.9%) 
Undecided
  
 3,086 (5.6%) 
Declined
  
 2,491 (4.5%) 


New valued image nominations[edit]

   

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 2024-05-28
Scope:
Polyura narcaeus lissainei ( Naga Nawab) - ventral

User:MaheshBaruahwildlife should not be uploading so many similar images. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-05-29 05:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Lioconcha lorenziana (Lorenz's Pitar Venus), left valve
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2024-05-29 07:54 (UTC)
Scope:
World War II memorial in Uharove
Used in:
Global usage
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2024-05-29 08:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Bone spoon - (ML500060) in Museo Arqueológico Larco, Lima (Peru)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-05-29 16:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Schloss Wildenberg (Zernez) Entrance gate to the courtyard.
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Thi (talk) on 2024-05-29 21:59 (UTC)
Scope:
George Eliot by François D’Albert Durade
Used in:
en:George Eliot

 Comment Following the example of other works to art in this forum, the museum or location where the art work was photographed is usually listed in round brackets at the end of the scope. --GRDN711 (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-05-30 05:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Madonna and Child between Saint Jerome and Saint Augustine by Leonardo Boldrini (Museo Correr)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-05-30 05:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Erannis defoliaria – mounted specimen Male dorsal

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-05-30 05:12 (UTC)
Scope:
The baptistery of Chiesa di San Giovanni Battista in Treviso
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-05-30 05:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Bosemprella incarnata, right valve

 Support useful and used. --GRDN711 (talk) 12:59, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2024-05-30 09:42 (UTC)
Scope:
World War II memorial in Stupky
Used in:
Global usage

 Support Useful and used. --GRDN711 (talk) 12:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JmH2O(talk) on 2024-05-30 15:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Main facade of the Palais des Beaux-Arts of Charleroi
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-05-30 16:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Detail of the exterior. Cathedral of St. Peter Wooden entrance. (Northside.)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
— Rhododendrites talk |  on 2024-05-31 01:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Frank Pepe Pizzeria, exterior
So you took the time to leave this comment on three nominations but didn't bother to actually check whether they're notable? (They are.) — Rhododendrites talk |  16:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
— Rhododendrites talk |  on 2024-05-31 01:50 (UTC)
Scope:
Scarr's Pizza, exterior
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
— Rhododendrites talk |  on 2024-05-31 01:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Flaco memorial
Reason:
A temporary memorial to a celebrity bird. Hard to pick one best-in-scope, but I like this one (and it's the one used in the article) -- — Rhododendrites talk | 
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
— Rhododendrites talk |  on 2024-05-31 01:56 (UTC)
Scope:
Rizzo's Fine Pizza, interior
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-05-31 05:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Altarpiece of Saint Martin - The Crucifixion Musée Goya, Castres France

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:40, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-05-31 05:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Eriophyes tiliae - Lime nail gall or bugle gall of European lime - close up
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-05-31 05:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Tombstone of Pileo Onigo - Complesso di Santa Caterina - Treviso
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-05-31 05:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Bosemprella incarnata, left valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2024-05-31 08:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Stryzhakiv
Used in:
Global usage
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-05-31 17:04 (UTC)
Scope:
Fresco of Assumption in glory with saints Reformierte Kirche San Bastian (Zernez)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-06-01 04:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Ancient Roman busts in the Museo archeologico nazionale (Venice) - Female Head (inv.162)

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 05:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-06-01 04:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Église Saint-Pierre de Blagnac, France - La nef et le chœur (The nave and the choir)

 Best in Scope--Alexander-93 (talk) 18:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-06-01 04:29 (UTC)
Scope:
The Pope's dream - Storie di sant'Orsola by Tommaso da Modena - Complesso di Santa Caterina - Treviso
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-06-01 05:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Vasticardium pectiniforme ( Fan-shaped Cockle), right valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 1 June 2024
Scope:
Tongeia kala (Black Cupid), ventral

 Best in Scope--Alexander-93 (talk) 18:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-06-01 16:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Detail Kaiser-Wilhelm-Brücke (Trier) Brick arch construction on the south side.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-06-01 18:27 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-AMG C 63 (S205) - right front view
Used in:
de:Mercedes-Benz Baureihe 205
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-06-01 18:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-Benz H243 (2023) - left rear view
Used in:
de:Mercedes-Benz H 243
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-06-01 18:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Volkswagen Jetta VI GLI - right rear view
Used in:
de:VW Jetta VI
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2024-06-01 19:59 (UTC)
Scope:
Mass grave of 230 Soviet soldiers in Stryzhakiv
Used in:
Global usage
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2024-06-01 22:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Genealogy of the 14 Sapa Inca (Inca emperors), Machupicchu pueblo (Peru)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Günther Frager (talk) on 2024-06-01 23:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Nora Morales de Cortiñas
Used in:
en:W:Nora Cortiñas, es:W:Nora Cortiñas, eu:W:Nora Cortiñas, ast:w:Nora Morales de Cortiñas, ca:W:Nora Morales de Cortiñas, etc.

 Best in Scope--Alexander-93 (talk) 07:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
WildMouse76 (talk) on 2024-06-02 01:42 (UTC)
Scope:
Fringilla coelebs syriaca (Syrian chaffinch) male
Reason:
Blends less into the background, external anatomy easier to identify, highest quality and resolution image in scope, used in the English Wikipedia's article on this species. -- WildMouse76 (talk)

 Best in Scope--Alexander-93 (talk) 07:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-06-02 04:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Corpus Domini frontal in Museo Correr Venice

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-06-02 04:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Autoritratto (Selfportrait) Luigi Serena - Museo civico Luigi Bailo - Treviso

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-06-02 04:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Altarpiece of Saint Martin - The Mass of Saint Gregory Musée Goya, Castres France
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-06-02 05:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Vasticardium pectiniforme (Fan-shaped Cockle), left valve
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-06-02 07:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-Benz H243 (2023) - left front view
Used in:
de:Mercedes-Benz H 243
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-06-02 07:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-AMG C 63 (S205) - right rear view
Used in:
de:Mercedes-Benz Baureihe 205
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-06-02 07:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Dacia Duster III - right front view
Used in:
de:Dacia Duster, uk:Renault Duster
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2024-06-02 10:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Triumph TR250, right rear view

very dark. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination @Charlesjsharp: I agree, Thanks for the advice. Photo taken in a garage, IMO difficult to repare.--Pierre André (talk) 22:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
WildMouse76 (talk) on 2024-06-02 14:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Cygnus olor (mute swan) (juvenile swimming)
Reason:
NOTE: This is a renomination -- WildMouse76 (talk)

Previous reviews

Pinging @Archaeodontosaurus and GRDN711: , the users involved in the discussion -- WildMouse76 (talk) 18:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May be the most valuable but too many categories to check. It was a mistake by whoever created galleries for every month when the birth cycle varies depending on location. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-06-02 15:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Testudo graeca nabeulensis (Tunisian tortoise) male
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-06-02 15:33 (UTC)
Scope:
Testudo graeca nabeulensis (Tunisian tortoise) juvenile
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-06-02 15:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Calandrella brachydactyla rubiginosa (Greater short-toed lark)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2024-06-02 16:57 (UTC)
Scope:
War memorial of Ault, Somme (Fr)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2024-06-02 19:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Skala
Used in:
Global usage
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2024-06-02 21:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Ault-Onival Maisons dites Alsace et Lorraine (Somme), (Fr)
Open for review.



Pending Most valued review candidates[edit]

Remote view of Florence Duomo by night[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Mile (talk) on 2015-03-11 15:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Remote view of Florence Duomo by nigth
Reason:
So far best nigth/dusk photo from Michelangelo hill, would say best remote view in general (dusk view is far more beneficial - colors). -- Mile (talk)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
dllu (t,c) on 2024-05-22 20:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Remote view of Florence Duomo by night
Reason:
In my opinion technically superior to existing VI File:Florence Duomo from Michelangelo hill.jpg -- dllu (t,c)

 Oppose The left tower is less visible. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Au Vieux Paris d'Arcole (Paris)[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2024-03-31 13:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Au Vieux Paris d'Arcole (Paris)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2024-03-31 13:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Au Vieux Paris d'Arcole (Paris)
  •  Comment @Archaeodontosaurus: has much experience with Valued Image nominations. I am going to express my opinion but would encourage him to further comment if he wishes.
Per COM:VIC, there are three Valued Image nomination cases - new nomination, renomination and MVR - Most Valued Review. MVR applies only when there is an existing image that already has a VI rating based on a defined generic scope (you will see a result statement indicating that it was reviewed and supported for VI as shown in the MVR for "Remote view of Florence Duomo by night".
@Sebring12Hrs: - when I search Commons on the results of the first VI nomination found at "Commons:Valued image candidates/Au Vieux Paris d'Arcole, 24 Rue Chanoinesse, 75004 Paris, 1 May 2018.jpg", I find there was no review on this VI nomination - no support, no oppose; therefore undecided. Probably the personality rights statement based on the people present that made reviewers uncomfortable in expressing an opinion on VI.
You have brought forth another image of the same building but without people. That should take care of the personality issue. IMHO, suggest you remove this MVR and enter this different image as a new VI nomination with the same scope and scope-link as previous. Please add a clear reason in the new VI nom describing what you are doing. --GRDN711 (talk) 04:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

African chaffinch taxonomy change[edit]

Bust of Bertrand Russell by Marcelle Quinton, Red Lion Square, London[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
--Thi (talk) 18:48, 23 March 2024 (UTC) on 2024-03-23 18:48 (UTC)[reply]
Scope:
Bust of Bertrand Russell by Marcelle Quinton, Red Lion Square, London
Used in:
en:Bertrand Russell, de, es
I opened the most valued review. 1656321.jpg seems to be taken before the restoration. --Thi (talk) 11:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
--Thi (talk) 11:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC) on 2024-04-12 11:27 (UTC)[reply]
Scope:
Bust of Bertrand Russell by Marcelle Quinton, Red Lion Square, London

 Comment Ok for the base, but wa can't really see the face. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 21:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment @Thi: - When I search Commons on "Commons:Valued image candidates/Bust Of Bertrand Russell-Red Lion Square-London.jpg/Archive of previous reviews", I see that there was no decision on the original VI nom - just a comment from Ikan expressing concern about Bertrand's head without a stand. In your new image, you appear to have addressed that issue. There probably could be 2 VIs here - one for the head and another for the head + stand.
IMHO, suggest you remove the MVR and enter this head + stand image as a new VI nomination with a suitable scope and scope-link. Please add a clear reason in the new VI nom that describes what you are doing and why you think if merits VI. --GRDN711 (talk) 04:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


To initiate a most valued review, please go to the dedicated MVR sub page.
Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

All open candidates in an MVR have to have their status set as "discussed" while the review is ongoing. Only when all candidates are due for closure can the MVR be closed.

Refer to Most valued review, the promotion rules and the instructions for closure for details.

Pending valued image set candidates[edit]

Warning This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Valued_image_candidates&oldid=751225986"