Jump to content

Commons:Quality images candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Translate this page; This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.
Shortcut
Skip to nominations

These are the candidates for becoming quality images. This is not the same thing as featured pictures. If you want informal feedback on your photos, please ask at Commons:Photography critiques.

Purpose

[edit]

The purpose of quality images is to encourage the people that are the foundation of Commons, the individual users who provide the unique images that expand this collection. While featured pictures identifies the absolute best of all the images loaded into Commons, Quality images sets out to identify and encourage users’ efforts in providing quality images to Commons. Additionally, quality images should be a place to refer other users to when explaining methods for improving an image.

Guidelines

[edit]

All nominated images should be the work of Commons users.

For nominators

[edit]

Below are the general guidelines for Quality images; more detailed criteria are available at Image guidelines.

Image page requirements
[edit]
  1. Copyright status. Quality image candidates have to be uploaded to Commons under a suitable license. The full license requirements are at Commons:Copyright tags.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. No advertisements or signatures in image. Copyright and authorship information of quality images should be located on the image page and may be in the image metadata, but should not interfere with image contents.
Creator
[edit]
Proposed wording changes to specifically exclude AI generate media from being eligable for QI see discussion

Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible unless the photographer is a Commons user. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.

Technical requirements
[edit]

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.

Resolution
[edit]

Bitmapped images (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) should normally have at least 2 megapixels; reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media. This rule excludes vector graphics (SVG) or computer-generated images that have been constructed with freely-licensed or open software programs as noted in the image's description.

Image quality
[edit]

Digital images can suffer various problems originating in image capture and processing, such as preventable noise, problems with JPEG compression, lack of information in shadow or highlight areas, or problems with capture of colors. All these issues should be handled correctly.

Composition and lighting
[edit]

The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting. Lighting and focus also contribute to the overall result; the subject should be sharp, uncluttered, and well-exposed.

Value
[edit]

Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects.

How to nominate

[edit]

Simply add a line of this form at the top of Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list Nominations section:

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description  --~~~~ |}}

The description shouldn't be more than a few words, and please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below:

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description (by [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.

Number of nominations

[edit]

Carefully select your best images to nominate. No more than five images per day can be added by a single nominator.

Note: If possible, for every picture you nominate, please review at least one of the other candidates.

Evaluating images

[edit]
Any registered user whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 constructive, stable edits on Commons (excluding user and talk pages), other than the author and the nominator, can review a nomination. For an easier evaluation you can activate the gadget QICvote

When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.

How to review

[edit]

How to update the status

Carefully review the image. Open it in full resolution, and check if the quality criteria are met.

  • If you decide to promote the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you liked it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Promotion and add your signature, possibly with some short comment.

  • If you decide to decline the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you didn't like it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Decline and add your signature, possibly with a statement of the criteria under which the image failed (you can use titles of section from the guidelines). If there are many problems, please note only 2 or 3 of the most severe, or add multiple problems. When declining a nomination please do explain the reasons on the nominator’s talk page – as a rule, be nice and encouraging! In the message you should give a more detailed explanation of your decision.

Note: Please evaluate the oldest images first.

Good voting practices

[edit]
  1. Do not have an image moved to consensual review ("Discuss") unless someone else added a vote with which you disagree.
  2. If you think the image meets QI criteria, use "Promotion" right away.
  3. If you think the image does not meet QI criteria and the issues cannot be solved, use "Decline" right away.
  4. If instead you believe that the issues can be solved, leave a comment without changing the status (keep it as Nomination).
  5. Do not add new votes under already promoted or declined images if you agree with the decision. The bot checks the date of the last comment, so this only delays the result.
  6. If a comment raises an unresolved issue, promoting is generally considered impolite. Only promote if the issue is clearly minor, fixed, or incorrect - and say so briefly. If you’re not sure, add a comment (don't change status). Change to "Discuss" only once conflicting votes appear.

Grace period and promotion

[edit]

If there are no objections within a period of 2 days (exactly 48 hours) from the first review, the image becomes promoted or fails according to the review it received. If you have objection, just change its status to Discuss and it will be moved to the Consensual review section.

How to execute decision

[edit]

QICbot automatically handles this 2 days after a decision has been made, and promoted images are cached in Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted awaiting categorization before their automatic insertion in to appropriate Quality images pages.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then consider also nominating the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

Manual instructions (open only in cases of emergency)

If promoted,

  1. Add the image to appropriate group or groups of Quality images page. The image also needs to be added to the associated sub pages, only 3–4 of the newest images should be displayed on the main page.
  2. Add {{QualityImage}} template to the bottom of image description page.
  3. Move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 2026.
  4. Add the template {{File:imagename.jpg}} to the user’s talk page.

If declined,

  1. move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 2026.
  • Images awaiting review show the nomination outlined in blue.
  • Images the reviewer has accepted show the nomination outlined in green
  • Images the reviewer has rejected show the nomination outlined in red

Unassessed images (nomination outlined in blue)

[edit]

Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 31 2026 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process

[edit]

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

How to ask for consensual review

[edit]

To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day.

Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you cannot make a decision, add your comments but leave the candidate on this page.

Consensual review rules

[edit]

See Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules

Page refresh: purge this page's cache

Nominations

[edit]

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures will only work on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with:

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 03:34, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC)
  • Please insert a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first; many are still unassessed
  • If you see terms with which you are unfamiliar, please see explanations at Photography terms

If you are not ready to Promote or Decline an image, you may leave a Comment instead.

If someone else has already promoted or declined an image and you disagree, you may cast an opposite voice or use Discuss — this will move the image to the Community Review section.

If you agree with a previous decision, there is no need to cast the same vote again, as doing so only delays the final closure of the nomination.

Please nominate no more than 5 images per day and try to review on average as many images as you nominate (check here to see how you are doing).


May 31, 2026

[edit]

May 30, 2026

[edit]

May 29, 2026

[edit]

May 28, 2026

[edit]

May 27, 2026

[edit]

May 26, 2026

[edit]

May 25, 2026

[edit]

May 24, 2026

[edit]

May 23, 2026

[edit]

May 22, 2026

[edit]

May 21, 2026

[edit]

May 20, 2026

[edit]

May 19, 2026

[edit]

May 18, 2026

[edit]

May 14, 2026

[edit]

May 12, 2026

[edit]

May 9, 2026

[edit]

Consensual review

[edit]

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add  Oppose and  Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".



File:Collines_Parc_National_de_Bouhedma.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination les collines et plaines avec Acacia, Parc National de Bouhedma.--Smailtn 10:20, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
     Support Good quality. --Pangalau 14:44, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
     Oppose Lovely landscape, but not sharp at all. Also categories of location are needed. --Екатерина Борисова 00:50, 29 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Екатерина Борисова 03:45, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Senden,_Dortmund-Ems-Kanal_(Alte_Fahrt)_--_2026_--_1311.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Path along the old route of the Dortmund-Ems Canal near Senden, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 14:17, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Oppose Can't find anything in focus here, sorry. --Екатерина Борисова 01:54, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
    IMO focus is on the trees (right). --XRay 04:32, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
    Unfortunately these trees are also blurry. -- Екатерина Борисова 03:47, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
    ✓ Done I can't figure out what's supposed to be out of focus or blurry here. The resolution is high, and even when I zoom in, I can still see the leaves are sharply defined. Nevertheless, I've enhanced the sharpness just a little bit. -- XRay 06:18, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
    I'm grateful for your efforts, but when I zoom in, I still see that all the image is not sharp enough. Let's wait for other opinions. -- Екатерина Борисова 01:18, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Harlock81 13:52, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Front_Saluki_Dog_Show_2026_Ooty_May26_A7CR_10809.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Saluki, front view, Dog Show 2026, Ooty, Tamil Nadu, India --Tagooty 09:45, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • A little bit noisy background, but very good focus. --Lvova 17:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
    @Lvova: NR done. Please see new version. --Tagooty 14:56, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
    Moving to CR to get an opinion on the improved version. --Tagooty 03:23, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 13:52, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Head_Right_Saluki_Dog_Show_2026_Ooty_May26_A7CR_10806.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Saluki head, Dog Show 2026, Ooty, Tamil Nadu, India --Tagooty 09:45, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • A little bit noisy background, but very good focus. --Lvova 17:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
    @Lvova: NR done. Please see new version. --Tagooty 14:56, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
    Moving to CR to get an opinion on the improved version. --Tagooty 03:23, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 13:52, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Belplasca.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Belplasca --Wilfredor 20:14, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Image description needs to include the model # and description of what this camera is. --GRDN711 21:52, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
    @GRDN711: There are not multiple models of this camera --Wilfredor 17:08, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
    You may not be thinking this way but Commons is a depository for images to be used now and in the future in the Wiki world. If you want your image to be in use in 50 years, it must be clearly identified with as much supporting detail as possible so that it can be found. --GRDN711 15:43, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
    The user doesn't understand that there isn't a number, and responds with a generic comment. --Wilfredor 00:58, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Comment The description, Category and file name all contain only a single word "Belplasca". For the image to be useful, say to a search engine, it is reasonable to ask that the description have some details about the camera. See #3 in QIC guideline. --Tagooty 08:48, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
✓ Done --Wilfredor 00:55, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
 Support It's overcategorized now :) I think the image is good and there's no need for a large number of categories for a unique object that is difficult to confuse with something else. -- Екатерина Борисова 03:57, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
 Support Very comprehensive, thank you. --Tagooty 09:03, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Екатерина Борисова (talk) 04:00, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

File:AC_SO_Rahmenprogramm_27._April_Reiner_Haseloff_I.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Reiner Haseloff at an supporting event of the Karlspreis ceremony in Aachen, 2026 --Grunpfnul 10:00, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Can you reduce the lighting on his face and body? It's too much from my point of view --New York-air 06:37, 19 May 2026 (UTC)
     Oppose  Not done in a week. --Екатерина Борисова 02:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
    The personal settings of an user shouldn't be a reason to decline an image. The brightness is ideal in my eyes --Grunpfnul 06:41, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
    I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. However, it is common practice to decline photos where the author does not respond for a long time to the comments made. -- Екатерина Борисова 01:21, 29 May 2026 (UTC)
    Don't worry, you didn't offended me, but i often see this case that a wrong setting by the user lead to comments like the one above - and now a declined image -- Grunpfnul (talk) 08:35, 29 May 2026 (UTC)
    I removed my opposing vote because it's no longer relevant now. -- Екатерина Борисова 03:51, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes?   --Екатерина Борисова 03:51, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

File:The_Virgin_and_Child_with_St._Anne_by_Leonardo_da_Vinci.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination The Virgin and Child with St. Anne by Leonardo da Vinci --Wilfredor 12:17, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • WB looks off, very blueish picture compared to others of the same painting --Benjism89 17:12, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    yes because the las louvre Retoration --Wilfredor 16:55, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
     Oppose I doubt it, I can't find any picture of this painting with colors like yours, nor did I find records of a recent restoration which would have changed colors. I'm opposing this nom, so that you can take it to CR if you want --Benjism89 17:59, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
    it was restored and now look more blue, From what I have seen, the yellowish photos are the ones you find on the internet, while the ones that look bluer are the ones taken by photographers who upload them directly to commons. The same thing happened to me when I saw the Mona Lisa, I had this yellowish image in my mind since I was a child, when I saw it I thought, what is this! --Wilfredor 03:22, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Harlock81 13:52, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Bronisław_Czech_Academy_of_Physical_Culture,,,_unfinished_building,_Czyżyny,_Kraków,_Poland.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bronisław Czech Academy of Physical Culture, unfinished building, Czyżyny, Kraków, Poland --Igor123121 04:40, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 12:32, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose According to EXIF data (and if compared just visually) this image is identical to these two (1, 2), both are already a QI. So this image was uploaded three times with slightly different names and slightly different crop. I don't think this is a good practice in Commons - moreover, in the future these pictures may well be nominated for deletion as duplicates. Also I don't think it's worth encouraging such uploads by assigning a QI status several times to the same picture actually. --Екатерина Борисова 02:13, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Екатерина Борисова. --Tagooty 09:01, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Екатерина Борисова 01:21, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

[edit]
  • Sat 23 May → Sun 31 May
  • Sun 24 May → Mon 01 Jun
  • Mon 25 May → Tue 02 Jun
  • Tue 26 May → Wed 03 Jun
  • Wed 27 May → Thu 04 Jun
  • Thu 28 May → Fri 05 Jun
  • Fri 29 May → Sat 06 Jun
  • Sat 30 May → Sun 07 Jun
  • Sun 31 May → Mon 08 Jun