Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/April-2009

Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.

For promoted entries, add {{VPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} to the bottom of the entry, replacing FILENAME.JPG with the file that was promoted.
For entries not promoted, add {{VPCresult|Not promoted| }} to the bottom of the entry.
Do NOT put any other information inside the template. It should be copied and pasted exactly, and only the first one should have FILENAME.JPG replaced with the actual filename.

	Archives
2009:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December

Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Cover of Tamil magazine Kalki issue dated March 28, 1948

File:Kalki 03 1948.jpg

Cover ot Tamil magazine Kalki dated March 28, 1948

Reason: I feel that this scan of Kalki magazine cover issue dated March 28, 1948, is valuable due to its age. Unlike those of the West, there are very few Indian newspapers and magazines which keep online archives dating to the 1940s. The archives are not in publication and these issues are extremely rare and therefore, collector's items. Besides, as far as I know, there is no PD image of any other Indian magazine, that too in a vernacular language, anywhere in Wikipedia.
Articles this image appears in: Kalki (magazine), Madras Presidency, Kalki Krishnamurthy
Creator: Uploaded by Ravichandar84
Time Requirement: Y Added to Kalki (magazine) 14 February 2009. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 04:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --The Enforcer _{Office of the secret service} 03:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question - If this is a scan, why is the image tilted and the whole cover not shown? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This issue is a part of a bound collection of old books that I have in my possession. As this particular book appears after a number of other books in the bound collection, I found it very difficult to put it under the scanner and close the lid. I do not want to mutilate the book by stripping it off from the bound collection.-The Enforcer _{Office of the secret service} 13:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per above. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in the picture-The Enforcer _{Office of the secret service} 10:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is there any reason there is no author information? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a bit confused as to who should be considered as the author of this image. Since this is a graphic design, is it the designer of the cover, editor of this issue of the magazine or the uploader of the image.-The Enforcer _{Office of the secret service} 05:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the name of the cover designer.:-)-The Enforcer _{Office of the secret service} 15:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, if it is rare, out of print, there are no or very few similar images and the uploader has done their best to have it appear in a reasonable way, I can see there being a value to this image. The opposition seems to be based upon this being a featured picture proposal. --can dle •wicke 17:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support - Mainly per Candlewicke. The tilt, while noticeable, can be overlooked for the rarity and value of the image. VX!^talk 19:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While guidelines are not specific with regards to quality, an image is expected to be presentable. This is markedly cut off and extremely tilted. Rare or not, we do have minimum expectations and a lack of representation of a subject is not necessarily a reason for inclusion if the quality is not at the level we expect. This may not be FPC, but there are minimum requirements. Plus no consensus. Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC) (Wadester16 - April Fool's Sig)[reply]

Spotted Hyena and two cubs, Ngorongoro Crater, Tanzania

File:Spotted Hyena and young in Ngorongoro crater.jpg

Original - Spotted Hyena (Crocuta crocuta) and two cubs, Ngorongoro Crater, Tanzania

Reason: It illustrates an important aspect of this animal, namely the appearance of the offspring. It's been used for over two years [1]and is well composed and has a free licence.
Articles this image appears in: Spotted Hyena
Creator: The Rambling Man
Time Requirement: Y Added January 2007. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 16:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --The Rambling Man (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Looks good to me. –Juliancolton ^Talk · ^Review 04:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support agree with above editors—Chris! _ct 18:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. --can dle •wicke 17:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. High quality picture, fits right in with the article. J Milburn (talk) 19:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Spotted Hyena and young in Ngorogoro crater.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC) (Wadester16 - April Fool's Sig)[reply]

United States Supreme Court Building

Reason: Reasonable quality photograph of the west face of the Supreme Court building, with minimal intrusion of tourists, on a beautiful day
Articles this image appears in: Supreme Court of the United States, United States Supreme Court building, in addition to being on Template:WikiProject USCJ, which is used on hundreds of talk pages.
Creator: Wadester16
Time Requirement: Y Added to United States Supreme Court building July 2008. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Looks good overall, though I wouldn't mind if it was cropped a bit. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice picture, but I wouldn't mind if it was cropped a bit either. VX!^talk 19:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support- seems slightly tilted and the tourist is a shame, but generally a nice picture. Heavily viewed/used, interesting looking building. Hopefully some day we can have a featured picture of this, but, until then... J Milburn (talk) 19:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:USSupremeCourtWestFacade.JPG ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC) (Wadester16 - April Fool's Sig)[reply]

Pyroclastic flows at Mayon Volcano

Reason: I stumbled on to this awe inspiring image of the Mayon Volcano erupting and emitting pyroclastic flows in 1984 not too long ago. I thought to myself, why isn't it a Featured picture, much less a Valued picture. It would probably fail an WP:FPC nomination because of it's quality, but I think it is of large enough encyclopedic value (a clear demonstration of what a pyroclastic flow is and a eruptive column) to be a valued picture.
Articles this image appears in: Pyroclastic flow, Mayon Volcano, and Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology
Creator: Jacks Rache (later cleanup by Nicolas Lardot)
Time Requirement: Y Added to pyroclastic flow (where it is the lead image) March 2005. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 19:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --VX!^talk 19:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - As one of the most volcanically active users around here :), I'll admit I've looked at this many, many times. It also would fail FPC because of its size. Ceranthor 19:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support, fantastic image, and extremely useful and educational. It's a shame it's so small, but it certainly deserves to be a valued picture. J Milburn (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - Beautiful image, but it's rather small and grainy. I doubt there's anything better, however. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - a good image but not particularly clear. As an image of an event that isn't everyday, fine. On its own, not brilliant. But certainly has encyclopedic value. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Pyroclastic flows at Mayon Volcano.jpg --~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 18:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Territorial change of China

Reason: I think this is a good EV picture
Articles this image appears in: History of China, China, Ancient history
Creator: Pojanji
Time Requirement: Y Been in History of China for a month [2]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --—Chris! _ct 22:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would suggest trying this at FPC. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 02:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Apparently not. But I would have voted for it. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 02:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this deserved to be a FP, imo. But the FP regulars are a bit picky, though. That's why I try VP first.—Chris! _ct 18:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I noticed that there were concerns regarding its factual accuracy during the FPC; have these been addressed? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the factual concern is referring to the purposed caption, not the image. As far as I know, this image is pretty accurate.—Chris! _ct 21:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the concern was regarding this description used for the Featured picture nomination, "China was under dynastic rule from the Xia Dynasty (2070 - 1600 BCE) until the collapse the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1912." The image appears to be accurate. VX!^talk 05:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support, ON THE CONDITION that the dates are accurate. Have they been verified? It seems a smidge fast, and there are some funny little dots on the coastline, but it's certainly a great educational tool. J Milburn (talk) 19:41, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the quality can definitely be improved upon, but this is a great image as far as educational value is concerned.—Chris! _ct 03:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More reviews, please. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The quality could be improved upon, but it's highly encyclopedic and informative, so I'm willing to overlook the minor issues. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Skyline Panorama

Reason: I stumbled onto another good picture while reading the Singapore article a while ago. I kept the picture in the back of my mind for a while thinking it could be a FPC. It's got some quality issues (some blur and minor artifacing), but it demonstrates the downtown core of Singapore brilliantly. Has high value.
Articles this image appears in: Singapore and List of tallest buildings in Singapore
Creator: Someformofhuman (later touch up by Thingg - edit one)
Time Requirement: Y Has been in Singapore at least since December 2008 (didn't feel like looking any further). ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 23:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009 (Original), March 2009 (Edit 1)

Support as nominator --VX!^talk 19:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support original What a beautiful picture. Though I don't know what edits were made to the alternative, the first one has better compression as a thumbnail. Zoo Fari 22:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support original it looks better than the edited version.—Chris! _ct 03:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So does the over saturation matter? Noodle snacks (talk) 05:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hi, I did notice today that my image has been nominated as VPC, and I would like to thank you for it. =) Anyway, I admit this photo is a little too overly saturated and I can re-edit according to your needs if you guys have any advice or suggestions in mind to further enhance my photo. However I can't do much about the blurring issue (The crane on the left was moving which I didn't took notice!) And EOS 400D doesn't seem to work well with noise. This is as clean as it gets however. Right now I have also searched high and low for better lenses out there and probably if I save up I can get hold a 5D MK II as a decent upgrade. Once again thanks very much for your support and if any suggestions on improving my photo I welcome them. =) PS this image has been taken a long time ago and I may go there again and re-take an updated shot of the skyline. The Sail at Marina Bay (The one with the blurred crane on the left) is completed. Someformofhuman Speak now! 08:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support either one. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A less saturated version could be more enc. Fletcher (talk) 22:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose based oversaturation of the original/edit 1. It kinda hurts my eyes and the image quality is lacking a bit. It does seem to be a very contrasty scene, but I wouldn't have overexposed it by 0.3EV as you've blown a lot of highlights (which may have been blown even if you underexposed, but still, you gotta try!). I think it might also have benefited from softer contrast. Compositionally, it's pretty good though. Did you shoot RAW? If you did, there might be more room to make some adjustments... As for the 5D MK II, the problem is that good lens choice will only become more important as a result, not less. ;-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Remember, VPC is mainly about EV. I only see issues with quality here, and while meritorious, I'd like to know your views on the image's EV. The traffic seems to show it's a pretty popular image... Tho note my aim here is not to badger. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know, hence my vote was based mainly on the issue of saturation which is an EV problem more than an image quality problem. Images still have to be accurate. With toned down saturation, I wouldn't oppose. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Diliff. MER-C 08:14, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhist temple at Royal Palace in Luang Prabang

Reason: Good clear picture which illustrates the subject really well, in my humblest of opinions.
Articles this image appears in: Luang Prabang (Jan 7, 2008), Religion in Laos (Apr 2, 2008)
Creator: The Rambling Man
Time Requirement: Y See above. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 22:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --The Rambling Man (talk) 20:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Although I don't like the trees obscuring part of the view, it has a high encyclopedic value (illustrating a Buddhist temple) to make me look past it. VX!^talk 20:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per high encyclopedic value. I kinda like the trees, as well... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Can't it be photographed from a diff angle, view without the leaves in between? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not without losing the perspective and the multiple roof layering. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:58, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hyatt Regency walkway connection detail

**Original** - (a) Original connection design of the St. Louis Hyatt Regency (b) Modified design that ultimately led to the failure of the walkway

Reason: A little background is needed here. For civil engineering students, two of the most cited structural failures in the United States are that of Galloping Gertie and the Hyatt Regency walkway collapse. In the lobby of the Hyatt Regency in St. Louis, hung two elevated walkways that connected two sides of the building through the atrium. The two walkways were initially designed to be supported by rods from the ceiling girders, with one nut on each rod holding the upper walkway (a) and another nut below that holding the lower walkway. Due to construction issues, the design was changed to that shown in (b). Unfortunately, this meant that the nut previously used only to support the upper walkway now had to support both the weight of the upper and lower walkways. In addition, the cross beams of the upper walkway were also taking twice the intended load. The cross beams were designed as double C-channels welded together. The weld and channels were only designed to take the weight of one walkway, but the design change doubled that. On the night of collapse, 2,000 people were gathered in the atrium, many of them on the walkways. Due to the excessive weight, the walkways collapsed, killing 114 people and injuring 200 others. It was the worst structural failure (in terms of lives lost) at the time (and, as far as I'm aware, the worst unintentional structural failure to date). It shows how such a small difference can have a drastic outcome. The image is a simple representation of a death sentence to more than a hundred people. Please see the article for more information; it's really a fascinating story. Also listed below the nominated image is the resulting (failed) cross beam.
Articles this image appears in: Structural engineering, Hyatt Regency walkway collapse
Creator: DTR
Time Requirement: Y Added to Hyatt Regency walkway collapse June 2007. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 18:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 18:48, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Noodle snacks (talk) 23:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Would it be possible to remove the unneeded capitals? "Original design" and "Actual construction" would surely be better? J Milburn (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've made the request here, unless someone else wants to jump on it. I assume it's a pretty quick fix. Assume you'll be voting on it as has been suggested with the above comment. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 23:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, now my concerns have been met. High quality, informative drawing that adds a lot to the article. Lacks any wow-factor, meaning it's not FP worthy, but fits right in here. J Milburn (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow factor is not an en-wp criteria. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, I'm sorry, I realise. That's not what I meant, I phrased it rather badly. J Milburn (talk) 18:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Just wanted to say that I only made a vector trace of the work. The original creator's/uploader's details are on the source image page. It was the first image I traced in the Graphics Lab, so I hope it is of some value! =) --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 19:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Bearing that in mind, I support.

More input, please. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. MER-C 08:13, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support very informative—Chris! _ct 19:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not clear to me what the 2P, P etc means. The caption doesn't explain it, the image itself could (in my opinion) be knocked up in less than an hour in Visio or similar. This does has encyclopedic value, but it makes me wonder how many "technical" drawings I could create in a few moments with a simple caption that may be considered similarly. Yes, the story behind the failure is of note but this image for me isn't particularly special. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P = Pressure. MER-C 13:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, I should have said it's not clear to a non-expert. My masters degree in engineering should have this P covered...! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Techincally, P = load (pressure depends on x-sectional area of a given material, which in this case could be anything; the details aren't specific). P & F are the two letters we typically use to designate load (F for force and P for... well nobody ever told me; it's just what we do). But you're right; I will change that. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 18:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:HRWalkway.svg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yehoshua Hankin (1864-1945)

Reason: Image is a very rare and good quality image of the historical figure.
Articles this image appears in: Yehoshua Hankin.
Creator: Designed by Ruth Beckman-Malka. uploaded by User:Jaakobou.
Time Requirement: Y Added March 2007 ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 16:09, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support A tiny image, but good EV seeing how there are no other images in the article. I searched Commons as well and nothing else turned up for this person. We don't have a minimum size requirement here, right? Fletcher (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Your own judgement. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 23:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hard to find picture illustrating a previously unillustrated article. I tried Google images and it was the only unambigiously PD image out there. MER-C 08:16, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support predominantly per MER-C. Rare images which are free to use should be considered valued by us. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Spencer^{T♦Nominate!} 17:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Yehoshua Hankin (1864-1945).jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coco Cay Beach

**Original** - Beach on Cocy Cay (officially Little Stirrup Cay), a private island leased by Royal Caribbean International from the Bahamas

Reason: Pretty good quality image of the stereotypical beach photo with palm trees growing over the water. Not FP material due to brightness and number of people in the water, but well used in respective articles.
Articles this image appears in: The Bahamas, Little Stirrup Cay
Creator: Wadester16
Time Requirement: Y Added to Bahamas 16 January 2009.
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I really don't think that people in a shot are a big evil of some kind. The enc of File:Honeymoon Bay Sunset.jpg is pretty low, but I think the person adds to it, for example. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a cruise-company exclusive island, so it's not going to be crowded. The best way to get enc would be to have a cruise ship somewhere in the picture. MER-C 08:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose used only in a gallery in the main article Little Stirrup Cay. MER-C 08:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MER-C. An image in a gallery decreases the value it has to the article. Zoo Fari 00:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant oppose per above two editors regarding its use in a gallery, nice image though—Chris! _ct 19:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but the problem for me comes exemplified in the nomination "stereotypical beach photo" - so not exactly packed with encyclopedic value. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent: no supports. All is right with the universe... and VPC. Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 20:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lomatium parryi

Reason: Beautiful failed FP. Acceptable DOF, high resolution, and quality macro. Time requirement elapsed (in Lomatium since Feb 26, 09)
Articles this image appears in: Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, Lomatium parryi, Lomatium, Flower, Parsley, Umbel
Creator: ZooFari
Time Requirement: Y Added to Lomatium parryi 2 March. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~See my points below ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 02:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]
For Historical Reference: Re-nom'ed at 18:07, 3 April 2009 UTC ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator --Zoo Fari 02:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm going to call foul on this. The image was only added to its "home" article on 2 March (when the article was created). In addition it was only added to the genus article on 27 February. Currently, neither of these meet the month time limit. I didn't check the time for Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area or Flower, but these are very minor articles for this image to be in. I would suggest waiting until this meets the time requirement for Lomatium parryi. Comments? ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 02:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I will repost this next week when both the genus and home time requirement elapse (I'd also thought it said Feb 26, sorry). Zoo Fari 02:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have now reposted the candidate. All articles elapsed the month requirement and I think today the home article gets elapsed... Zoo Fari 22:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support it here. MER-C 01:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, six articles. Not bad... Zoo Fari 02:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support meets my interpretation of a valued picture. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per votes at FPC --Muhammad(talk) 07:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --can dle •wicke 02:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Lomatium parryi.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 18:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Butterfly portrait

Reason: Good Ev, failed at FPC die to DOF limitations.
Articles this image appears in: Butterfly, Hypolimnas misippus
Creator: Muhammad
Time Requirement: Y Added to Hypolimnas misippus 4 February 2009. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 07:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - to be frank, it's not a great portraiture for a butterfly. if it were used maybe for the Proboscis itself it would have been good. Although, that one would probably benefit from a different angle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaakobou (talk • contribs)
Neutral. Nice detail but insufficient DOF and angle hurt enc. A side view would probably be better. MER-C 11:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No quorum. Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 20:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Formica rufa

Reason: Good quality, EV and aesthetics
Articles this image appears in: Formica rufa, List of ants of Great Britain
Creator: Richard Bartz
Time Requirement: Y Added to Formica rufa July 2007. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 07:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 11:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zoo Fari 15:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --can dle •wicke 02:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:A Formica rufa sideview.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 20:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pied Oystercatchers

Reason: Encyclopaedic image for wikipaedia :P.
Articles this image appears in: Pied Oystercatcher
Creator: Noodle snacks

Support as nominator --Noodle snacks (talk) 10:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 11:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice image—Chris! _ct 06:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Muhammad(talk) 08:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, lovely. J Milburn (talk) 15:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zoo Fari 23:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Haematopus longirostris Pair Bruny Island.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Union Station

**Original** - Union Station, a train station serving the greater Washington, D.C. area with services from Amtrak, MARC, Virginia Railway Express, and the Washington Metro. Following World War II, the station began to degrade until it was renovated for the bicentennial of the United States, becoming the National Visitor Center. It lacked popularity and eventually many of the updates (especially "the Pit") were closed. A complete redesign opened in 1988, offering Union Station as a mall/train station combination, complete with a movie theater, shops, and an extensive food court.

Reason: Accurate depiction of given subject on nice day. Used in a number of articles, including as the lead of its home article.
Articles this image appears in: Union Station (Washington, D.C.) (lead image), Pennsylvania Railroad, Glossary of rail terminology, National Register of Historic Places listings in Northeast Quadrant, Washington, D.C.
Creator: Wadester16
Time Requirement: Y Added to Union Station (Washington, D.C.) August 2008.
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 11:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I believe this image can be adjusted. The white balance seems "cloudy" or a strong filter is being used. Can we make it to daylight white balance? Zoo Fari 16:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a version with brightness adjusted. Zoo Fari 19:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support ALT no blown highlights or artifacts created during editing. Zoo Fari 19:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Insufficient resolution, it would be great if I could read the inscription. MER-C 02:54, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Its +3mp, much greater than the FPC requirement of 1000px of either side. --Muhammad(talk) 20:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but by resolution I mean detail not number of pixels. MER-C 07:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think what MER-C is trying to tell us is that the resolution is not enough to read the carved words near the top of the building (next to the statues). Zoo Fari 23:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support alternative. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:31, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Magen

Reason: Image is extremely rare and encyclopedically valuable, illustrating the first corps commander (and a founder of) Military Police Corps in Israel.
Articles this image appears in: Military_Police_Corps_(Israel)#Leadership
Creator: unknown original, upload and some leveling/cleanup work was a collaboration between User:Jaakobou and User:Ynhockey

Support as nominator --Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 17:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source for this image? MER-C 08:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - it is certainly encyclopedic, but it is way too blurry in my opinion.—Chris! _ct 06:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support—I'm rather new to the valued picture process, but was alerted about this picture, and from what I understand from the criteria, it fits them. The image appears in numerous Israeli books and is very low-resolution and low-detail, so the work done on this image digitally was very good. It is encyclopedic and valuable because, as far as I know, this is the only surviving/published portrait of Magen. It is educational because this person has laid the foundation of the Military Police Corps and no article about the corps's history or commanders is ever given without a picture of Magen, and this is as I said the only picture we have of him. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 12:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, was going to pass on this one but Ynhockey's points moved me to shed a figurative tear. --can dle •wicke 23:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, ditto. Well argued! J Milburn (talk) 14:09, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:DannyMagen.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 14:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gyromitra infula

Reason: A wonderfully weird looking fungus, added to the article a few months ago. Great profile shot, you can see everything of importance about the fungi, but it is a little blurry at high resolution, meaning it wouldn't manage at FPC. The environment in which the fungi is found is also well displayed.
Articles this image appears in: Gyromitra infula
Creator: Sasata
Time Requirement: Y Added 16 January 2009. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: April 2009

Support as nominator --J Milburn (talk) 15:50, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Is that hair part of the fungus? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No, looks like thistledown to me. J Milburn (talk) 16:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Alright then, support. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK for me. MER-C 03:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support as photographer. Sasata (talk) 09:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, lovely EV image. --can dle •wicke 23:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks fine, perhaps a bit overexposed.Noodle snacks (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Gyromitra infula sasata.JPG ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cape Barren Goose

Reason: A bit drab, but a clear illustration of a flightless goose.
Articles this image appears in: Cape Barren Goose
Creator: Noodle snacks
Time Requirement: Y Added July 2008. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: April 2009

Support as nominator --Noodle snacks (talk) 05:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support no obvious problems. MER-C 09:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I agree. --can dle •wicke 23:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No quorum--> Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feral Barbary Dove

Reason: Reasonable quality and enc
Articles this image appears in: Feral, Barbary Dove
Creator: Noodle snacks
Time Requirement: Y Added to Barbary Dove August 2008. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: April 2009

Support as nominator --Noodle snacks (talk) 05:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support no obvious problems. MER-C 09:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - nice bird —Chris! _ct 02:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, yes. --can dle •wicke 23:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Feral Barbary Dove.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magna Carta

Reason: Scan of one of the copies of the Magna Carta. Not up to the scan expectations of, say, the US Constitution, but still a reasonable quality image of such an historic document.
Articles this image appears in: Magna Carta, Charter, Constitution, Social rule system theory, more...
Creator: 13th century English nobles
Time Requirement: Added to Magna Carta August 2004. (Note that the current version was uploaded over an old version March 2008). ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image Page Traffic Stats: April 2009

Support as nominator ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:17, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - insufficient resolution. What is the point of a scan of a document when you can't read the text? MER-C 09:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- So you're fluent in Latin, then? ;-) ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just because you and me can't understand it, doesn't mean that it's not important. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support While the resolution is low, this is nonetheless an OK EV image about a historical document. (BTY, I'm not fluent in Latin. :))—Chris! _ct 04:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No quorum --> Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 21:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Childe Harold's Pilgrimage (Dugdale edition)

Reason: It's very useful to have a good-quality title page from a first or early edition in articles about books (and poems). While not the first edition, this is still quite early - 1825, seven years after the poem was completed - and the rather nice engraving adds a bit of wow to it.
Articles this image appears in: Childe Harold's Pilgrimage, George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron
Creator: I. H. Jones

Support as nominator --Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose doesn't meet one month requirement. Maybe later. MER-C 03:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does not yet meet time requirement. Come back on May 19th => Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 11:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

United States Bill of Rights

Reason: historic document with good EV and high resolution; also been in the article for a month
Articles this image appears in: United States Bill of Rights
Creator: Keeleysam

Support as nominator --—Chris! _ct 02:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 03:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I can't read a word of it. --can dle •wicke 23:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if this is as clear as and as easy to read as FP File:Constitution Pg1of4 AC.jpg, I would have nominate this to FPC.—Chris! _ct 00:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No quorum => Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 04:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Shanghai

Reason: A striking image with good EV. It failed FPC twice but seems to meet VP criteria. Been in article for a month
Articles this image appears in: Second Sino-Japanese War
Creator: HongQiGong

Support as nominator --—Chris! _ct 06:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, can't find anything wrong here. --can dle •wicke 23:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The caption is really long, almost half the size of the photo itself. Can we make it more succinct? Steven Walling (talk) 03:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I shorten it a bit. What do you think?—Chris! _ct 19:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. Steven Walling (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support per caption alterations. Steven Walling (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No quorum => Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 04:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haridwar from opposite bank of the Ganges, 1866.

Reason: Earliest available photograph of Holy pilgrimage city of Haridwar, dated 1866.
Articles this image appears in: Haridwar
Creator: Abhishekjoshi

Support as nominator --Ekabhishek (talk) 05:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The British Library logo is going to make ppl skip over this nomination. Might want to crop. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 03:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, three days after crop suggestion is not carried out. There doesn't appear to be much interest in this image. --can dle •wicke 16:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 03:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Image now corrected! Logo removed by a commons user. Thanks!--Ekabhishek^talk 11:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Wattlebird

Reason: Noisy, and I had zero reach at the time. Still, pretty clear with only a bit of beak obscured. Wattlebirds and honeyeaters tend to spend most of their time in the bushes, so a clear shot is quite difficult.
Articles this image appears in: Yellow Wattlebird; + Wattlebird, List of Australian bird emblems, Symbols of Tasmania, List of honeyeaters Zoo Fari 00:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Creator: Noodle snacks

Support as nominator --Noodle snacks (talk) 13:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 10:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Not good composition, poor technically, and there is no doubt that next time you see one with your current setup you'll get a shot that far exceeds this, yet as far as I can tell passes all criteria on vpc. Still, do you really want to set this standard? Flying Freddy (talk) 15:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd just delist it when I get something better. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have added the image into two more articles to increase EV. Zoo Fari 00:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Little Wattlebird

Reason: I still can't believe that this didn't pass FPC. The image quality is there, and it is practically spewing in enc; The wattlebird feeds on nectar in the surrounding flowers.
Articles this image appears in: Little Wattlebird, Corymbia ficifolia
Creator: Noodle snacks

Support as nominator --Noodle snacks (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, the bird itself is shown very well, the surroundings add to the image for the reasons explained. J Milburn (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I guess so, the obscuration doesn't really subtract that much from enc. MER-C 10:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support besides the bird, this is showing what it feed on.—Chris! _ct 00:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clearly meets all criteria. Steven Walling (talk) 03:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per everyone else. --can dle •wicke 16:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, yeah, that's pretty. Pretty unusual it didn't pass FPC that is. Valley2city^‽ 18:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sophus Bie ^(talk) 01:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Anthochaera chrysoptera.jpg ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gallo Pinto

Reason: This image is used on both Costa Rica to illustrate what is considered the national dish of the country, gallo pinto. As a hallmark of Tico culture and Costa Rican cuisine, a good quality image of gallo pinto is a key educational facet to any discussion of the culture. This image has been used on the Costa Rica article in the culture section for more than a month, and is the best image of the dish available to Wikipedia. In addition to being fairly high quality, it's the most culturally-accurate photo of those uploaded, since it presents the most common preparation of the dish.
Articles this image appears in: Costa Rica, Gallo Pinto
Creator: Original photographer is James Diggans, and I (Steven Walling) am the uploader. I also cropped the image to its current state as used in the articles.

Support as nominator --Steven Walling (talk) 00:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Neither of the captions tell us what exactly is in the plate. The article of Gallo pinto shows the image with the caption "a Costa Rican breakfast with gallo pinto (right)". Therefore I'm understanding this as the Gallo pinto is only the item to the right. What about the rest of the food? Zoo Fari 00:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gallo pinto is the rice and bean dish on the right. It would be strange and inaccurate to show the food alone, since it's never served by itself. Steven Walling (talk) 00:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

	Archives
2009:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December