This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.
Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.
Promoting an image
If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.
For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.
All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.
The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.
If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.
Delisting an image
A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.
Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.
For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.
However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.
Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.
Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).
Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.
Step 2: Create a subpage
For Nominations
To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.
For Delists
To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.
For Delist and replace
To create a subpage for your delist and replace, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.
Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.
How to comment for Delist Images
Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.
Editing candidates
If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.
Is my monitor adjusted correctly?
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background. Note that the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
Support – Fine composition w/xcllnt panoramic detail. Good EV as inception of the "Frederician Rococo" genre, which later culminated in Sanssouci Palace, a historic landmark. – Sca (talk) 16:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found this image as the best representative of the Argentine culture, within the Latin American one. The pose, place, clothes and facial expressions demonstrates all the dramatic mood involved and required for this type of demonstration. Pure art
@Janke: the background is Avenida Corrientes, known as "the Street that Never Sleeps", in the heart of Buenos Aires and a meeting point to view the iconic obelisk, a symbol of the city/country. It is part of the EV. ArionStar (talk) 12:37, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I should clarify, the support is primarily due to high EV. I also don't think that POV concerns are legitimate reason for opposing—will a good EV high quality Hitler portrait never pass at FP? FP doesn't equal endorsement. UnpetitproleX (talk) 18:12, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One of the harder photographers to find a photograph of - the National Portrait Gallery, London, for example, only holds this image of him. I think it's a fine portrait, full of character.
Adam, you are a brilliant restorationist (apparently that word has a different meaning, but whatever). Crop and rotate, get rid of those unsightly smudges, and you have my support. JayCubby14:14, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meets all criteria I think. I'm not an expert in photography so others may need to chime in. It's a beautiful photo of one of the palace's most scenic spots in a popular season for visiting it.
Oppose Very low quality. And what's the point of shooting a landscape at f/2.8 and 1/500 sec, while you can easily increase the DoF ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:13, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is the identity of the photographer here really not known? It's a mildly famous image and it seems likely that other records (the current source is an official Flickr account) would identify who took it. Nick-D (talk) 10:45, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.
Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
When promoted, perform the following:
Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the April archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:
Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2025 at 16:17:54 (UTC)
Old version. Note the overexposed areas, lack of pixels, and other things.New version. Note the improved coloration, correction of overexposed areas, and improved pixel count.
put the replacement on here and change all articles with the current photo then we can go through the nomination process Wcamp9 (talk) 03:21, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ideally, you'd just run this as a "Delist and Replace", and upon closing the replacement would be done. This prevenrs issues - unlikely in this case - where the superior version is actually inferior. D&R for what it's worth. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs.20:12, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's a very good image, but such dramatic images often have less EV than one where the buildings can be seen. I'm neutral on it. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs.13:59, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does illustrate a skyline quite well, but it's a bit noisy when viewed at high zoom. Support, but I'd like to see noise reduction run. JayCubby16:28, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2025 at 13:44:14 (UTC)
Original – Extreme damage from the violent 2024 Greenfield tornado, which had measured winds of up to 318 miles per hour (512 km/h). Aerial imagery of EF4 damage to homes in northeastern Greenfield, Iowa. Peak wind speeds were estimated at 170 mph (270 km/h) in the area of this photograph.
Reason
Passed all of the criteria & is a high-quality (4,000 × 3,000 pixels) photograph of some damage from the 2024 Greenfield tornado. The tornado was small in width, which creates this damage gradient of homes leveled near buildings nearly untouched.
Generic question Sca — What “visual information” is not “readily intelligible to general readers/viewers”? Tornado = destruction. This tornado was highly in the news as having over 300 miles per hour (480 km/h) winds. I would say if a general reader was told “this is tornado damage”, almost every general reader/viewers could easily understand that is tornado damage. Could you be more specific as to what visual information is not going to be intelligible to the general person? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)17:28, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the higher difficulty of underwater shots pushes this over. Do wish Charles wasn't on holiday: Working with older photography isn't great for identifying what a modern camera should be capable of. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs.14:04, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support now -- I do still think this could be a wee bit less rosy, but the fish is now well within the coloration variation I see on Google Images. (Side note: If you, dear FP voter, still see the image at full size or its thumbnail to be pink, clear your browser cache). JayCubby03:41, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because of the red overall color of the entire image. Checked all images on common, only this, and another by the same author are red. Also, the gravel background here is untypically red. Sometimes underwater photographers use a reddish filter to counteract the blueness of water - I don't know if that is the case here, though. --Janke | Talk09:57, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Dear @Shonagon:. I hope you’re doing well. I’ve noticed that the current development process applied a rather aggressive noise reduction, which unfortunately removed some of the canvas texture visible in the earlier version. Would it be possible to reprocess the RAW file to try and restore these details? Thank you very much Wilfredor (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Wilfredor There has been no noise reduction between versions; I'm sure that only light levels was changed to reach the best balance, which is the one of the current version. Best regards Shonagon (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We're sure this is the colours with the replaced varnish, and not just a levels adjustment to remove yellows? Becuse if the former, of course this is better, but if the latter, it's clearly bad. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs.20:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_Zanz%C3%ADbar,_Tanzania,_2024-05-30,_DD_74.jpg)
.jpg)
Done. I have, of course, left non-mainspace uses alone. JayCubby 19:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
_and_the_Dubai_skyline_(25781049892).jpg)
,_islas_Ad_Dimaniyat,_Om%C3%A1n,_2024-08-15,_DD_05.jpg)
Comment: Dear @Shonagon:. I hope you’re doing well. I’ve noticed that the current development process applied a rather aggressive noise reduction, which unfortunately removed some of the canvas texture visible in the earlier version. Would it be possible to reprocess the RAW file to try and restore these details? Thank you very much Wilfredor (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
