Jump to content

Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

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.

Skip to current candidates Valued Image links:

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
60,246 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
 54,348 (90.2%) 
Undecided
  
 3,339 (5.5%) 
Declined
  
 2,559 (4.2%) 


New valued image nominations

[edit]
   

View promotion
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-14 11:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Krasnopilka (Uman Raion) - Outpatient clinic (view from the east)
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-09-15 04:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Spes-Vera (ship, 2001) Starboard and front.
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Tisha Mukherjee (talk) on 2025-09-15 06:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Hypothymis azurea styani (Black-naped Monarch) male
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Tisha Mukherjee (talk) on 2025-09-15 06:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Cacomantis passerinus (Grey-bellied Cuckoo male) calling
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-15 12:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Krasnopilka (Uman Raion) - School (view from the northeast)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-15 12:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Krasnopilka (Uman Raion) - Church (view from the northeast)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 15 September 2025
Scope:
Bhagadatta austenia austenia (Khasi Grey Commodore), dorsal
  •  Comment nominator created category above and it seems to be an error. There's another category called Category:Bhagadatta austenia with 5 images in it. This species is also known as Limenitis austenia
  •  Comment There are several problems.
    • 1) The previous comment was not signed...
    • 2) For the moment, the name is "Bhagadatta austenia": the name "Limenitis austenia" has been abandoned. However, discussions continue regarding a possible reclassification.
    • 3) It is strongly recommended not to create a special category for species that have no known subspecies. The category "Bhagadatta austenia austenia" duplicates the category "Bhagadatta austenia" and should be deleted.
    • 4) The correct scope is "Bhagadatta austenia (Khasi Grey Commodore), dorsal."

--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:44, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

View promotion
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 15 September 2025
Scope:
Aulocera loha loha (Himalayan Eyeless Satyr), ventral
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-16 05:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Cerussite mono cristal - Ussel mine - Corrèze - France
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-16 05:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Retable de la Nativité - Cathédrale Sainte-Marie d'Auch
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-09-16 06:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Strigilla carnaria (Large Strigilla), right valve
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-09-16 10:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Entrance to the birthplace of Abbé Prévost, (Hesdin), view from rue Daniel-Lereuil

 Comment Good topic but there is a left tilt... easy to correct. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Tausheef Hassan (talk) on 2025-09-16 11:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Khwaja Salimullah
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-16 13:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Rodnykivka, Uman Raion - Village council and house of culture (view from the northwest)

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:24, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-16 13:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Rodnykivka, Uman Raion - School (view from the northeast)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-09-17 05:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Strigilla carnaria (Large Strigilla), left valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-17 05:41 (UTC)
Scope:
Chapelle du Saint-Sépulcre - Cathédrale Sainte-Marie d'Auch
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-17 05:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Nepa cinerea (Water scorpion) - Dorsal side.

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:43, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-17 08:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Botvynivka - School (view from the south)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-17 08:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Botvynivka - House of Culture (view from the north)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
FieldMarine (talk) on 2025-09-17 13:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Batch production; historic technical development in food processing.
Reason:
This shows the machines used in an important step in the industrialization of pasta manufacturing. Batch production was the process used for many years prior to the continuous production that is used today. It was a significant technological leap in food processing, going from completely manual process to a more automated process on a larger scale. This technology paved the way for the creation of pasta factories and commercializing of pasta. Interestingly, this setup made excellent pasta, just at smaller production then continuous production methods used today. -- FieldMarine (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-09-17 16:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Machicolation of 'hôtel de ville (Hesdin), view from Pl. d'Armes
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-09-17 21:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Former Saint-Jean hospice, then Jesuit college (Hesdin), view from Rue Prévost
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-09-17 22:05 (UTC)
Scope:
Hôtel de Siougeat, (Hesdin), view from Nobles' street
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 18 September 2025
Scope:
Callerebia scanda opima (East Himalayan Pallid Argus), ventral
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 18 September 2025
Scope:
Issoria gemmata (Gem Silverspot), male, ventral
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
ProtoplasmaKid (talk) on 2025-09-18 05:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Claudia Sheinbaum
Reason:
A portrait of a notable person and an historic event. -- ProtoplasmaKid (talk)
  •  Info The image illustrates, in principle, Mexico's main civic ceremony in good quality. The photographer had the opportunity to photograph the event properly, unlike existing images. On the other hand, President Sheinbaum is the first woman to lead the event in Mexico's history.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-18 05:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Chapelle du Saint-Sépulcre - Cathédrale Sainte-Marie d'Auch
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-18 05:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Statue of Joan of Arc in armor by Charles Desvergnes. Auch Cathedral
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-09-18 05:41 (UTC)
Scope:
Cochlicopa repentina, shell
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-18 08:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Botvynivka - Village Council and First Aid Station (view from the north)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-18 08:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Velyka Sevastianivka - Outpatient clinic (view from the west)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-09-18 10:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Remains of the Georges Brewery-malthouse, (Hesdin), view from Rue de l'Ancienne Poissonnerie
Used in:
Global usage List of links to usages on Wikimedia project content pages (optional) -->
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Msb (talk) on 2025-09-18 21:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Naissaar Museum - The military museum calles Naissaar Museum with its main exhibits
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-19 05:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Retable de la Chapelle Notre-Dame - Cathédrale Sainte-Marie d'Auch

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:41, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-19 05:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Statue de Sainte Quitterie - Trésor de la cathédrale d’Auch

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:41, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-09-19 05:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Donax denticulatus, unicoloured, right valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-19 08:50 (UTC)
Scope:
Velyka Sevastianivka - Kindergarten (view from the northwest)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-19 08:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Velyka Sevastianivka - House of Culture (view from the south)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-09-19 09:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Flour mill of ARAM, Villeneuve-d'Ascq, view from rue Albert Samain
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 2025-09-19
Scope:
Lethe wui (Golden Mystic) - ventral
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
E bailey (talk) on 2025-09-20 01:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Exterior of Hotel La Rose

 Support Best in scope --Llez (talk) 05:34, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-20 05:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Leucophyllum frutescens - Inflorescence
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-09-20 05:18 (UTC)
Scope:

Saint Roch by Jean-Baptiste Smets - Cathédrale Sainte-Marie d'Auch

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-09-20 05:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Donax denticulatus, unicoloured, Left valve
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-20 09:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Velyka Sevastianivka - Village council (view from the south)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-09-20 09:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Velyka Sevastianivka - Museum of the History of the Village (view from the north)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Tisha Mukherjee (talk) on 2025-09-20 09:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Coturnix coromandelica(Rain Quail male)
Open for review.



Pending Most valued review candidates

[edit]

hamster

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2011-12-10 22:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Cricetus cricetus (European Hamster)

 Support Excellent. All criteria met.--Jetstreamer (talk) 01:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)  Support Seems to be the best one Kersti (talk) 17:13, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky talk 20:32, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-01-04 16:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Cricetus cricetus (European hamster)
Reason:
replacing image of museum specimen -- Charlesjsharp (talk)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Acridotheres ginginianus nests

[edit]
   

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Moheen (keep talking) on 2025-04-27 22:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Acridotheres ginginianus nests

 Comment Neither of the two images is VI, so Most Valued Review is not the right place for these. If you intended to nominate a Valued Image, choose the best one and put it at the bottom of the "New valued image nominations" section --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Moheen (keep talking) on 2025-04-27 22:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Acridotheres ginginianus nests

 Comment Neither of the two images is VI, so Most Valued Review is not the right place for these. If you intended to nominate a Valued Image, choose the best one and put it at the bottom of the "New valued image nominations" section --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Au chat barré, ancien estaminet avenue du Peuple Belge (Lille)

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-24 21:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Old tavern Au chat barré avenue du Peuple Belge, Lille, view from Parc Louise de Bettignies
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-05-05 19:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Au chat barré, ancien estaminet avenue du Peuple Belge (Lille)
Reason:
Perspective is ok on this one. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:31, 5 May 2025 (UTC) -- Sebring12Hrs (talk)[reply]

 Support Light and colors are superior. --Milseburg (talk) 14:10, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Immeuble, 31 rue de Gand (Lille)

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-25 15:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Renaissance house, rue de Gand 31, Lille, view from rue des Tours
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-05-05 19:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Immeuble, 31 rue de Gand (Lille)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Hôtel du Juge Garde des Monnaies

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-27 16:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Hôtel du Juge Garde des Monnaies, 61-63, rue de la Monnaie (Vieux-Lille), view from 28 Rue de la Monnaie
Used in:
Global usage
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-05-05 19:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Hôtel du Juge Garde des Monnaies, Lille
Reason:
The left facade is visible from this view. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 06:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC) -- Sebring12Hrs (talk)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

bats

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charles (talk) on 2015-08-05 13:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Rhynchonycteris naso (Long-nosed proboscis bats)

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-05-06 15:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Rhynchonycteris naso (Long-nosed proboscis bats)
Reason:
I use a better camera these days! -- Charlesjsharp (talk)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Karl Marx

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
~ Moheen (talk) on 2015-12-20 06:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of Karl Marx
Used in:
see Global file usage
  •  Support I have checked this submision against the six VI criteria. AS this is a studio image, the geocoding requirement is not neccessary. In my opinion this submission meets the other five critieria. I would however recommend changing the scope from "Portraits of Karl Marx" (plural) to "Portrait of Karl Marx". (Singular) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvl (talk • contribs) 14:28, December 20, 2015‎ (UTC)
✓ Done ~ Moheen (talk) 10:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, There are several very good portrait paintings of KM. It is usual here to add "photographic portrait of KM".--Jebulon (talk) 20:56, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:25, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
User:Giovanni Cardinali (talk) on 2025-07-08 08:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of Karl Marx
Used in:
see Global file usagecontent pages (optional) -->
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Peace Palace

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Martinvl (talk) on 2016-12-15 16:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Peace Palace (front view), The Hague
Used in:
fr:Palais de la Paix, fy:Fredespaleis, nl:Vredespaleis, ru:Дворец Мира

Scope changed from Peace Palace (front view), The Hague to Peace Palace (front view), The Hague. Note the underlying category has been changed, not the visible text. --Martinvl (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. DeFacto (talk). 21:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Wolf im Wald on 2025-08-03 21:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Peace Palace (front view), The Hague
Used in:
en:Andrew Carnegie, es:Arquitectura de los Países Bajos
Reason:
Nearly similar view but higher detail level. -- Wolf im Wald
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Doris Day

[edit]
   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Yann (talk) on 2015-03-27 10:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Doris Day

 Info Studio shot, so no geocoding. Yann (talk) 10:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply] 

Scores: 
1. Doris Day, Aquarium, gottlieb.01841.jpg: -1
2. DorisDay-midnightlace.jpg: +5 <--
=>
File:Doris Day, Aquarium, gottlieb.01841.jpg: Declined 
File:Day-midnightlace.jpg: Promoted <--

--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
JayCubby (talk) on 2025-08-07 01:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Doris Day
Used in:
extensive
Reason:
Good resolution reproduction of a useful studio portrait. -- JayCubby (talk)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 09:39, 18 September 2025 (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=1008566955"