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 06 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]] 05:58, 6 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 6, 2026

[edit]

May 5, 2026

[edit]

May 4, 2026

[edit]

May 3, 2026

[edit]

May 2, 2026

[edit]

May 1, 2026

[edit]

April 30, 2026

[edit]

April 29, 2026

[edit]

April 28, 2026

[edit]

April 27, 2026

[edit]

April 25, 2026

[edit]

April 24, 2026

[edit]

April 23, 2026

[edit]

April 21, 2026

[edit]

April 19, 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:Kazimierza_Wyki_street.,_view_to_N,_Prądnik_Biały,_Kraków,_Poland.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Kazimierza Wyki street, view to N, Prądnik Biały, Kraków, Poland --Igor123121 03:50, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion  Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 04:08, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
     Oppose Too dark for the daytime photo IMO. Also it looks like WB is not good. Other opinions? --Екатерина Борисова 00:27, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

File:20251220_Việt_Nam_103_(2)_(130157).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination People’s Repiblic of China–Việt Nam Boundary Stone No. 103 (2), both sides of which belong to Việt Nam, backing to the PR China --Yumeto 16:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --Skander zarrad 21:13, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Needs PC. --Plozessor 03:38, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Left part background needs tpo be fixed --Michielverbeek 06:03, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:46, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Acanthus_mollis_May_2026-1.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bear's Breeches (Acanthus mollis) -- Alvesgaspar 19:23, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --Aciarium 12:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  for now A bit borderline because of the overexposed parts of the image. Could you please provide at least some kind of approximate location of the photo? --Robert Flogaus-Faust 00:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:47, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Leucanthemum_superbum_silverspoons_May_2026-1.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Flowers of Leucanthemum superbum -- Alvesgaspar 19:23, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --George Chernilevsky 20:23, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nice image but to be used going forward, it should have at least a verbal description of where the image was taken, preferably with GPS coordinates, all placed in the image info. What is “silverspoons”? If it is a varietal name, you need to document that in the image description as well. --GRDN711 22:39, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:49, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

File:2025-06-24_G11-0070_Achim-Lammerts_Neupotz-Rheinzabern.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination The anglers' home on the Altrhein Neupotz with privatized bathing beach in the foreground. --Syntaxys 09:03, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Oppose Harsh lighting, insufficient detail. --Tagooty 09:46, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Fixed @Tagooty, I reworked it from scratch, it's much better now. --Syntaxys 11:30, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Now I find the lighting dull and a bit unnatural, sorry. --Tagooty 08:29, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, I think it's still too bright. --Esniom 09:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • There are no overexposed areas, so may you explain what is too bright, please. --Syntaxys 11:32, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:51, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Peter_Malinauskas_at_the_2026_ANZAC_Day_Dawn_Service_at_the_National_War_Memorial,_Adelaide_(028A2208).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Peter Malinauskas at the 2026 ANZAC Day Dawn Service at the National War Memorial, Adelaide. --Pangalau 07:38, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --ArildV 10:09, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, the head down is too disturbing. --Esniom 09:52, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Esniom --Milseburg 13:04, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Milseburg 13:04, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Woman_reading_in_the_Jardin_botanique_de_Montréal.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Jardin botanique de Montréal --Wilfredor 20:52, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
     Comment Don’t people in your country have rights over their own image? In mine, which is a very permissive country, this photo would be illegal because the caption is misleading. It’s not what you say. --Lmbuga 00:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
    It’s not the Montreal Botanical Garden; it’s a girl with a first name and a surname. Just so you know! But you know that already--Lmbuga 00:10, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
    This person was in the same group, I always ask for permission after taking photos of people, not before, because you miss the moment. --Wilfredor 12:01, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
     Oppose Apart from the fact that verbal permission has no legal standing, even within the community (the OCR, for example), the photo is incorrectly titled and described. It needs a correct description to be a QI: it is not the ‘Montréal Botanical Garden’; it is something different or something else that just happens to be in that garden. --Lmbuga 20:24, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Listo, gracias --Wilfredor 11:41, 4 May 2026 (UTC) .
     Support Good now --Lmbuga (talk) 09:32, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Екатерина Борисова 00:51, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Interior_of_Spitalskirche_(Innsbruck).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Interior of Spitalskirche (Innsbruck) --Wilfredor 14:40, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Oppose The altarpiece is blurry, the center of the picture is blurry --Lmbuga 21:12, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
    Rebuild and resharpening, less noise reduction. Because the light condition IMHO the Quality is ok --Wilfredor 12:05, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
     Neutral Much better, but just above the altarpiece there’s an area which – I think – prevents the photo from being QI. Sorry--User:Lmbuga
    Era una iglesia muy obscura, intentare revelarlo de nuevo, el problema creo que viene del denoise. --Wilfredor 17:57, 3 May 2026 (UTC)]
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 16:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Procession_du_Mouled_-_Mouton_sacrificiel_conduit_dans_les_ruelles_de_Tunis.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Procession du Mouled - Mouton sacrificiel conduit dans les ruelles de TunisCeci est une image en rapport avec le thème Rites et rituels en/au :Moi, en tant que détenteur des droits d’auteur sur cette œuvre, je la publie sous la licence suivante :Cette image a été téléversée lors du concours photo Wiki Loves Africa 2026. --Atef Ouni 06:44, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:30, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Comment Categories have been added, as asked in the previous nomination, but this is not the right way to answer to a remark. --Harlock81 07:35, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose There're some random categories now, it's better than nothing, but still pretty useless. I'm sorry, but it's worth studying the rules first, and then nominating photos, even if the photos are very good. -- Екатерина Борисова 01:03, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:23, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Józefa_Dietla_Street,.,._tram_tracks._Kraków..Poland.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Józefa Dietla Street, tram tracks, Kraków, Poland --Igor123121 03:50, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 04:17, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unfortunate composition IMO with this tree and cropped waste container in the middle of the image. Please discuss. --Екатерина Борисова 01:21, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:26, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Нежност_и_традиција.jpg

[edit]

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 07:54, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Procession_du_Mouled_-_Troupe_stambéli_sous_arcades.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Procession du Mouled - Troupe stambéli sous arcadesCeci est une image en rapport avec le thème Rites et rituels en/au :Moi, en tant que détenteur des droits d’auteur sur cette œuvre, je la publie sous la licence suivante :Cette image a été téléversée lors du concours photo Wiki Loves Africa 2026. --Atef Ouni 17:05, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --Acroterion 01:20, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose There is not a single category for the image. --Екатерина Борисова 03:08, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
     Comment Atef Ouni added some categories. Ermell, sorry, this nomination was presented before your promotion of the same picture. --Harlock81 (talk) 07:49, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
     Comment These categories are way too broad and not helpful at all. I assume that a subcategory of Category:Stambali could be one of the categories that could be used, but I am not an expert for this. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:06, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 06:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Снага_заједништва_у_игри.jpg

[edit]

  • "Folklore of Serbia" is too broad and not very useful. Petar, you're an experienced user, and I'm surprised you didn't find the right categories. Just imagine that you are nominating this photo for FP :) Then it may become clearer which categories should be added (what place, what people, what happens in the picture, etc.) -- Екатерина Борисова 03:16, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 06:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Crkveno_vencanje_mladenci_u_narodnoj_nosnji.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Church wedding of the couple in traditional costme. Wiki Loves Folklore 2026 Serbia. Photo by User:Stechshotme --PetarM 09:49, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --Romainbehar 20:25, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No useful categories for the image. --Екатерина Борисова 03:17, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Harlock81 06:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Лепота_корена.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bosilegrad traditional wear, Wiki Loves Folklore 2026 Serbia. Photo by User:Stojanov1234 --PetarM 09:49, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •  Support Good quality. --Berthold Werner 14:23, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Ziv 22:31, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No useful categories for the image. Also nominated twice (first nomination was on April 29). --Екатерина Борисова 03:17, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  for now The category is extremely broad and the description is much worse than the nomination text. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:29, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
  • @Robert Flogaus-Faust This description is to broad to you ? "Traditional wear in Bosilegrad region, south Serbia." Also waiting if i get place, church name and type of wear. --PetarM 10:09, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thanks for adding the English description after my vote. The Serbian description is still rather meaningless. In addition, some more meaningful categories should be added. which is much better than the Serbian description. Please fix this as well, because I can't. In addition, I strongly recommend that you add meaningful categories, may be in a manner closely related to what I did for File:Pogled zaljubljenih.jpg considering the differences and the comment by Екатерина Борисова about the categories for the photo of the couple. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:42, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:29, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

[edit]
  • Tue 28 Apr → Wed 06 May
  • Wed 29 Apr → Thu 07 May
  • Thu 30 Apr → Fri 08 May
  • Fri 01 May → Sat 09 May
  • Sat 02 May → Sun 10 May
  • Sun 03 May → Mon 11 May
  • Mon 04 May → Tue 12 May
  • Tue 05 May → Wed 13 May
  • Wed 06 May → Thu 14 May