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.

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
58,395 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
52,628 (90.1%) 
Undecided
  
3,233 (5.5%) 
Declined
  
2,534 (4.3%) 


New valued image nominations

[edit]
   

View
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-03-26 22:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Chariot clock in Villa Carlotta (Tremezzo), view in the Napoleonic room (Italy)
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose =>
undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-03-27 10:05 (UTC)
Scope:
Rearview of Semovente 75/18 as displayed in Bergamo (Italy), left front view
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 10:22, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-03-29 17:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Eglise Saint Martin de Gondecourt, view from Pl. du Général de Gaulle
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-03-29 17:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Larix decidua in October (European larch in autumn colours.)
Used in:
Q133652304
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Petro Stelte (talk) on 2025-03-29 18:33 (UTC)
Scope:
Olea europaea 'Koroneiki'
Used in:
Global usage

 Support Please note that for plant or animal species, the binomial must be included in the scope and, if applicable, the subspecies added.

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-03-30 04:49 (UTC)
Scope:
The departure for Canaan by Arminio Zuccato - Museo civico di Santa Caterina in Treviso

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:24, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-03-30 04:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Stilbite Found by Jean-Godefroy Schreiber
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-03-30 05:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Anomia ephippium var. radiata, (Saddle Oyster), yellow form, left valve
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-03-30 07:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Hreblia (Uman Raion)

 Best in Scope--Alexander-93 (talk) 12:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-03-30 07:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Zaiachkivka (Uman Raion)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2025-03-30 12:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Smart Concept 5 - left rear view
Used in:
de:Smart Hashtag 5, it:Smart 5
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2025-03-30 12:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Audi S1 e-tron Hoonigan - left front view
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2025-03-30 12:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Abt XGT - left front view
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-03-30 16:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Altarpiece of the Holy Virgin in Saint-Piat'church.- (Seclin) (Fr)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Romainbehar (talk) on 2025-03-30 16:59 (UTC)
Scope:
Equestrian statue of Louis XIV, sculpture by François-Frédéric Lemot, Bellecour square in Lyon, France.

 Support Useful & Used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-03-30 17:05 (UTC)
Scope:
Rauwerd (Fries Raerd) War memorial. Maker of monument: Jo Vegter.
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-03-30 22:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Statues of Saint Michael in Collegiale Saint-Piat (Seclin)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-03-31 05:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Anomia ephippium var. radiata, (Saddle Oyster), orange form, left valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-03-31 05:23 (UTC)
Scope:
The drawing school by Domenico Maggiotto - Museo civico di Santa Caterina in Treviso
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-03-31 05:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Adscita statices male on Senecio squalidus
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-03-31 07:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Zoriane (Uman Raion)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-03-31 07:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Ivanhorod (Uman Raion)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Kelly zhrm (talk) on 2025-03-31 15:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Salutations - Charles Joshua Chaplin
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-03-31 17:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Sculptures Sur En, Sent. Suche nach Wasser. Artwork by Julia Roth.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-03-31 21:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Baptismal fonts of Église Saint-Piat de Seclin, Nord (Fr)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-04-01 04:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Anomia ephippium var. radiata, (Saddle Oyster), purple form, left valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-01 05:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Ectophasia crassipennis♂ on Dactylis glomerata
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-01 05:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Medal of Giovan Francesco Gonzaga I, Marquis of Mantua by Pisanello - Museo civico di Santa Caterina in Treviso
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-01 07:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Ivanhorod (Uman Raion)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-01 07:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Kuzmyna Hreblia
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-01 09:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Railway station in Gondecourt, Nord
Used in:
Global usage
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
St. Krug (talk) on 2025-04-01 13:42 (UTC)
Scope:
Baking in a wood-fired oven
This is my first nomination. Could you make a better suggestion?--St. Krug (talk) 05:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Honestly, no; this kind of situation is not common in VI. Scopes must be very precise; almost unique. The chosen scope can respond to multiple images... Don't get discouraged, we all had a difficult start in VI!--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
UnpetitproleX (Talk) on 2025-04-01 13:59 (UTC)
Scope:
Shiva shrine at Gangabal Lake
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2025-04-01 15:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Fiat Panda 4x40° - left rear view
Used in:
de:Fiat Panda
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-01 16:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Statue of Saint Peter in Kerascoët (Névez), view from Chemin de Kerascoët (Finistère)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-04-01 17:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Buorren 2 (Raerd) Front.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Mounir Neddi (talk) on 2025-04-01 22:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Sefrou Prefecture headquarters
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Shaan SenguptaTalk on 2025-04-02 03:42 (UTC)
Scope:
Manohar Parrikar's portrait
Reason:
Best available portrait -- Shaan SenguptaTalk

Previous reviews

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Shaan SenguptaTalk on 2025-04-02 03:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Category:Ram Nath Kovind
Reason:
Most in use also official portrait -- Shaan SenguptaTalk

Previous reviews

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Shaan SenguptaTalk on 2025-04-02 03:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Category:Bhagat Singh
Reason:
Most in use and Best in scope. -- Shaan SenguptaTalk

Previous reviews

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-04-02 04:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Finella pupoides, shell, slender shape
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-02 05:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Side notched point - Solutrean.

 Support Best in scope --Llez (talk) 06:22, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-02 05:14 (UTC)
Scope:
San Giovanni Battista bottega di Francesco Terilli - Museo civico di Santa Caterina (Treviso)

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 06:23, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-02 07:16 (UTC)
Scope:
World War II memorial in Lishchynivka (Uman Raion)

 Oppose In my eyes the crop of File:Ліщинівка (Христинівський р-н). Братська могила радянських воїнів.jpg is superior. The candidate's cut of the number of the year "1941" is less successful. The other image isn't ideal either, but it's better. --Milseburg (talk) 13:05, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-02 07:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Mala Sevastianivka

For me, it's not clearly the best in scope. File:Mala Sevastianivka Monument.JPG shows the inscription better. In the candidate, it's partially obscured by floral decorations.--Milseburg (talk) 13:18, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Milseburg: This inscription: "Eternal glory to the heroes who died in battles for the motherland" is considered standard and is written on almost all mass graves in Ukraine. Only the last word is not visible in the candidate, but this does not prevent us from understanding the essence of the inscription. File:Mala Sevastianivka Monument.JPG has the worst composition (the monument is tilted and not centered) —Nikride (talk) 13:46, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I didn't know that, and probably most users didn't either. Nevertheless, it's a disadvantage if you can only partially read the inscription on a monument. The other image has other disadvantages, so neither one convinces me as clearly valuable. --Milseburg (talk) 14:13, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2025-04-02 11:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Iglesia de Parinacota, fresco on plaster-baptism - Fresque sur plâtre-Baptème
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Milseburg (talk) on 2025-04-02 12:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Views of Siebengebirge from the lookout-tower on the Schomberg
Used in:
de:Schomberg
Reason:
This kind of a far view requires not only very clear air but also sufficient atmospheric refraction to raise the target above the horizon. Rare. -- Milseburg (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-02 13:17 (UTC)
Scope:
World War II memorial in Lishchynivka (Uman Raion)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-02 15:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Polyvalent hall of Seclin, view from Rue Jean Jaurès (Fr)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-04-02 16:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Sculptures Sur En, Sent. Magie des Augenblicks - 2021. Artwork by Roger Amrein.

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 04:53, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2025-04-02 21:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Façade of Old brewery Lepoivre in Seclin, view from Pl. Saint-Piat
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2025-04-03 04:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Chattonia triangularis, right valve
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-03 05:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Night at sea with knights - Antonio Marini - Pinacotheque Egidio Martini
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-03 05:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Vinca major (greater periwinkle) - Flowers and leaves
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-04-03 05:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Medal of Emilia di Montefeltro by Adriano Fiorentino - Recto
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-03 07:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Mala Sevastianivka
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nikride (talk) on 2025-04-03 07:42 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Oradivka
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2025-04-03 10:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Iglesia de Parinacota, fresco on plaster-crucifixion - Fresque sur plâtre-crucifixion
Open for review.



Pending Most valued review candidates

[edit]

Jujubinus errinae

[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 10:22, 1 April 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 10:22, 1 April 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.