Commons:Valued image candidates

Skip to image nominations

Skip to most valued reviews

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.

Valued Image links:

How to nominate an image for VI status

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)

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

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

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

How to review an image

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

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. -- ~~~~`	Comment My comment. -- Example	You have a comment.
`*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~`	Info My information. -- Example	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. -- ~~~~`	Question My question. -- Example	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.

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

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

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

61,293 closed valued image candidates
Closed as		Nominations
Promoted	55,294 (90.2%)
Undecided	3,411 (5.6%)
Declined	2,588 (4.2%)

New valued image nominations

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Tisha Mukherjee (talk) on 2025-12-02 16:39 (UTC)
Scope: Haliastur indus (Brahminy Kite) - in flight with food.
Borderline on image quality. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:12, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support Best in scope. Would suggest changing to "in flight with prey" instead of food, but, oh well Earth605 (talk) 15:02, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-05 06:17 (UTC)
Scope: View of Saint Bertrand de Comminges by Louis Sancet
Comment lacks in categorization: no categories related to paintings (medium, theme, country of origin) or to date of inception --Gower (talk) 08:41, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Categories oh that kind: 'October 2025 in Gers' and 'Category:2025 in Auch' are imho redundant in that case, because it is reproduction of a work of art not related directly to 2025 apart from the date the photo itself was taken --Gower (talk) 08:52, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] If the artist is sufficiently notable for VI, you can create a category for him. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:38, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Artist is definetively not notable enough Best in Scope Earth605 (talk) 15:12, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Done Louis Sancet now has a category --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:14, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:24, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-12-06 05:29 (UTC)
Scope: Reformierte Kirche Castrisch Church tower.+back of the church.
Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:01, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support only one in scope, good --Gower (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:25, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-06 06:19 (UTC)
Scope: Vase representing an officiant carrying a ceremonial cup - Musée des Amériques - Auch
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:25, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-06 06:22 (UTC)
Scope: Belvedere of Square Cuzin in Auch
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:06, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:25, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Earth605 (talk) on 2025-12-06 12:46 (UTC)
Scope: Arbutus canariensis - inflorescense
Comment The binomial should be in italics, and it would be more accurate to write "Inflorescence" rather than "flowers"...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Changed, Archaeodontosaurus -- Earth605 (talk) 16:30, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:43, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Gower (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-12-06 16:41 (UTC)
Scope: *Abat-sons of Saint-Pierre de Flers-Bourg* church**
Used in: Global usage
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:06, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2025-12-06 16:50 (UTC)
Scope: Hörsaal Elektrotechnik, Montanuniversität Leoben
Question How is this of more than local interest please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:48, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment important mining university, but is that lecture room worth our attention for VI? --Gower (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Oppose Definetily unsuitable scope. The image is irrelevant to any other scope. Earth605 (talk) 06:19, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Declined if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2025-12-06 16:53 (UTC)
Scope: Metallurgiegebäude (Montanuniversität Leoben), North Facade
Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2025-12-06 16:54 (UTC)
Scope: Montanuniversität Leoben - main building, East Facade
Support Useful and used. -- Earth605 (talk) 14:07, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2025-12-06 16:55 (UTC)
Scope: Rittinger-Gebäude, West Entrance
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:39, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2025-12-06 16:56 (UTC)
Scope: RWZ Leoben, ehemaliges Landesgericht, South Facade
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:39, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-06 18:42 (UTC)
Scope: Caracara plancus plancus (Crested caracara) in flight
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:42, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-06 18:45 (UTC)
Scope: Caracara plancus plancus (Crested caracaras) on carcass
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-06 18:46 (UTC)
Scope: Pyrope pyrope (Fire-eyed diucon)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: August (talk) on 2025-12-07 01:28 (UTC)
Scope: Wien Südbahnhof
Used in: w:de:Wien Südbahnhof
Reason: Best overview over the whole station. -- August (talk)
>* Support Useful and used. --Pierre André ^(talk) 09:38, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Brihaspati (talk) on 2025-12-06 04:17 (UTC)
Scope: Aerial View of Ahmedabad city
Should crop and rotate please. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:15, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment The scope must be linked to a category --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Brihaspati (talk) on 2025-12-07 02:59 (UTC)
Scope: Testing of flyback converters
Comment The scope should be more specific --Pierre André ^(talk) 21:56, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment The scope must be linked to a category--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:43, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Archaeodontosaurus: I think it is already linked to category.--Brihaspati (talk) 12:31, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Brihaspati: There are a lot of issues with the scope. Read COM:VIS and if you find a suitable one, then change it. For now, I must give this an Oppose vote. Sorry.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2025-12-07 05:37 (UTC)
Scope: Detail from Aua dil Mer Waterfall Above the Panixersee (Lag da Pigniu).
Question How is this of more than local interest please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Answer: This is one of the two main water supply streams used to maintain the large reservoir's water level for generating white energy. Therefore, it's crucial for preventing further global warming.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Oppose Scope is way too narrow. Earth605 (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for your comment. What kind of scope do you propose?--Famberhorst (talk) 17:51, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I would create a category for Aua dil Mer waterfall specifically and change the scope to: Aua dil Mer waterfall. Earth605 (talk) 06:26, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Done. Scope adjusted. Thanks for your suggestion.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] This image is better :link:, as it shows more of the waterfall. Also, you may want to create a Wikidata item. If you don't want to do it, I'll do it no worries. You may nominate the other image if you wish. --Earth605 (talk) 06:22, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for your suggestion: It all sounds rather complicated. I'm also having trouble translating because I don't speak English. Would you like me to withdraw this photo and nominate the other? I'd be happy to hear from you.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:34, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-07 06:20 (UTC)
Scope: Anthropomorphic ceramic depicting a captive - Musée des Amériques - Auch
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:46, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I wonder how they concluded it depicts a captive? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:40, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] That's the title given by the museum. Titles are standard. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:31, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-07 06:21 (UTC)
Scope: Wooden bowl decorated with a frieze of monkeys Culture Chimù - Musée des Amériques - Auch
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:00, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2025-12-07 06:44 (UTC)
Scope: Modiolus americanus (Tulip Mussel), right valve
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:59, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2025-12-07 09:35 (UTC)
Scope: Pyrocephalus rubinus (Scarlet flycatcher) immature male, lateral view
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:52, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2025-12-07 09:42 (UTC)
Scope: Acinonyx jubatus (Cheetah) head, hissing
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:54, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2025-12-07 09:48 (UTC)
Scope: Pelecanus onocrotalus (Great white pelican) head, frontal view
Support Useful (the only view exactly frontal) and used --Llez (talk) 06:43, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2025-12-07 09:58 (UTC)
Scope: Coracias caudatus (Lilac-breasted roller) in flight, showing wing underside
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:45, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2025-12-07 10:06 (UTC)
Scope: Merops apiaster (European bee-eater) in flight, chasing prey
Support excellent --Gower (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-07 10:55 (UTC)
Scope: Chroicocephalus maculipennis (Brown-hooded gull)
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 16:13, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-07 10:56 (UTC)
Scope: **Chroicocephalus maculipennis (Brown-hooded gull) with Grimothea monodon**
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-07 11:26 (UTC)
Scope: Chroicocephalus maculipennis (Brown-hooded gull) with Grimothea monodon chased by larus dominicanus (kelp gull)
too sophisticated scope imho (two species added), configuration difficult to repeat --Gower (talk) 15:50, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support The scope is very precise, there are no problems for me.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:34, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Earth605 (talk) on 2025-12-07 14:24 (UTC)
Scope: Bradina diagonalis - dorsal
Best in Scope (my upload BTW ;) --Gower (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Earth605 (talk) on 2025-12-07 16:27 (UTC)
Scope: Hippeastrum hybridum - flower
Comment The image shows a flower of Hippeastrum striatum (Lam.) H.E.Moore. It's a species, not a hybrid. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:45, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] and is oversaturated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:45, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

View promotion
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2024-12-08 01:28 (UTC)
Scope: 144 rue de Lastié, Cahors
Previous reviews * Support Useful.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:16, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:27, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-08 06:24 (UTC)
Scope: The stream in Jérôme Cuzin Square in Auch
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Archaeodontosaurus: important category/ies lacking like one connected to the streams in specific region --Gower (talk) 15:45, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment This stream is artificial; it only exists in this part of the garden. The garden is classified as a "Remarkable Garden". --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:02, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-08 06:28 (UTC)
Scope: Bowl decorated with a frieze of birds - Musée des Amériques - Auch
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:11, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Earth605 (talk) on 2025-12-08 06:31 (UTC)
Scope: Laugardælir
Reason: The first scope is of the parish/church. The second one refers to it being the best image of the settlement -- Earth605 (talk)
Oppose @Earth605: the church was built in in the 1960s. It is important more than local interest? ("Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope") Two scopes at the same time are not allowed: "An image cannot be nominated with several different scopes within the same nomination." (COM:VIS) --Gower (talk) 15:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] ---- Scope changed from 1. Laugardælasókn 2. Laugardælir to Laugardælir @Gower: -- Earth605 (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn". Oppose still, photo of the church without any other houses in my opinion is not the best illustration of any settlement, sorry --Gower (talk) 06:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2025-12-08 06:39 (UTC)
Scope: Modiolus americanus (Tulip Mussel), left valve
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:12, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-08 09:32 (UTC)
Scope: Lophonetta specularioides (Crested duck)
Comment how about that one? File:Crested duck punta arenas 1.19.25 DSC 1628.jpg --Gower (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-08 09:33 (UTC)
Scope: Lophonetta specularioides (Crested duck) with chick
Support very good and useful photo --Gower (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-08 09:34 (UTC)
Scope: Aramides ypecaha (Giant wood-rail)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:32, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Earth605 (talk) on 2025-12-08 14:55 (UTC)
Scope: Tower of Casa de las Bolas, Madrid
building is worth VI but nominated photo shows only small part of elevations (look here: link to the map); other images are also not very good for VI imho. --Gower (talk) 16:08, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] What do you mean by "small part of elevations"? What do you even mean with "elevations" @Gower: ?! Earth605 (talk) 16:52, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Earth605: I mean that is quite big building and nominated photo shows less than 50% of its exterior. Elevation in Cambridge Dictionary means: "the front or side of a building" --Gower (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Scope changed from Casa de las Bolas, Madrid to Tower at Casa de las Bolas, Madrid @Gower: --Earth605 (talk) 17:43, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn". Comment @Earth605: you need to change scope also in "scope" field at the nomination page --Gower (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Best in Scope after scope change, but it's a pity that it was cut from the bottom --Gower (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-08 15:24 (UTC)
Scope: 22 Henryka Dąbrowskiego Street in Chorzów, southeastern elevation
Reason: Villa di Biasi, cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-08 15:31 (UTC)
Scope: Hospital chapel in Świętochłowice, facade
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 06:25, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-08 15:36 (UTC)
Scope: Saint Joseph church in Chorzów, facade
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:40, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-12-08 17:45 (UTC)
Scope: Landau carriage in stables of Marshal de Saxe (Château de Chambord), front and right side
Used in: Global usage
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:35, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2025-12-08 23:30 (UTC)
Scope: Merops apiaster (European bee-eater) defecating
Comment @Giles Laurent: very good, but lacks coordinates (this species is not endangered so far) --Gower (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Done @Gower -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support good and probably only one in this unusual scope --Gower (talk) 17:15, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-09 05:09 (UTC)
Scope: Kalide house in Chorzów, view from the west
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland, one of the oldest surviving houses in Chorzów. -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:37, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-09 05:15 (UTC)
Scope: 2 Bałtycka Street in Chorzów, view from the south
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Question Does A/385/12 refer to this building? I have no idea how the registry works. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:08, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Charlesjsharp: yes, A/385/12 refers exactly to this building: "A" is immovable national register book of cultural heritage monuments in Poland (we have also "B" for movable and "C" for archaelogical ones), "385" – number of cultural heritage monument listed in a specific year, "12", short for year 2012. I updated footnote on Wikidata with working PDF file if you want to check it :) --Gower (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support I was just curious. Listed buildings are good for VI. We just get too many nominations for buildings or bits of buildings that are not in any way notable/valuable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:22, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-09 05:12 (UTC)
Scope: 9 Świętego Piotra Street in Chorzów, southeastern elevation
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2025-12-09 06:22 (UTC)
Scope: Lunulicardia hemicardium (Pacific Half Cockle), white form, right valve
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:05, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-09 06:45 (UTC)
Scope: Figure carrying chili pepper plants - Musée des Amériques - Auch
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:07, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-12-09 06:43 (UTC)
Scope: Head of a Sleeping Woman by Sylvain Salières - Musée des Amériques
Comment sculpture subject not represented in categories --Gower (talk) 07:02, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Done @Gower: --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:44, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment most important was for me that one: Category:Sculptures of sleeping women, I added it. --Gower (talk) 07:50, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support useful, good photo of the beautiful work of art --Gower (talk) 07:52, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: *KuldeepBurjBhalaike* ^(Talk) on 2025-12-09 08:19 (UTC)
Scope: Takht Sri Damdama Sahib, view from north-east
Comment unfavorable light, it could be something like this at the other time of the day: link --Gower (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] thanks, will try to take again with favorable light conditions some other day.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-09 09:40 (UTC)
Scope: Tyrannus savana savana (Fork-tailed flycatcher)
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 17:16, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-09 09:41 (UTC)
Scope: Tyrannus savana savana (Fork-tailed flycatcher) young adult
Support very good and useful --Gower (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-09 09:42 (UTC)
Scope: Hylocharis chrysura (Gilded hummingbird)
Comment hard choice, that one with QI is also very good: link --Gower (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I chose not to add calling to scope as I don't think we need even more scopes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: *KuldeepBurjBhalaike* ^(Talk) on 2025-12-09 10:26 (UTC)
Scope: Gurdwara Likhansar Sahib, view from south
Support good photo and useful one --Gower (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: *KuldeepBurjBhalaike* ^(Talk) on 2025-12-09 10:35 (UTC)
Scope: Central Gurdwara Saheb, Hyderabad, view from north-west
Comment @Kuldeepburjbhalaike: good but I recommend vertical perspective correction and adding coordinates (obligatory) --Gower (talk) 16:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Thanks @Gower: , i've uploaded a new version of file with some improvements. Comment @Kuldeepburjbhalaike: perspective looks the same, sorry --Gower (talk) 13:42, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2025-12-09 19:45 (UTC)
Scope: Mairie de Somain - Nord - France
Used in: wikidata wikidata
Oppose too many disctracting elements in the foreground, there are better options: 1 or 2 (different angle ov view) --Gower (talk) 14:46, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: August (talk) on 2025-12-09 21:51 (UTC)
Scope: Wichernstraße 30 (Leipzig)
Used in: Wikidata
Oppose, smaller resolution but parallel look is much better here: File:Wichernstraße 30 Leipzig.jpg --Gower (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2025-12-10 06:38 (UTC)
Scope: Lunulicardia hemicardium (Pacific Half Cockle), white form, left valve
Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 09:07, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-10 11:01 (UTC)
Scope: Basileuterus culicivorus azarae (Golden-crowned warbler)
Support very good --Gower (talk) 14:39, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-10 11:02 (UTC)
Scope: Ammodramus humeralis (Grassland sparrow)
Support perfect, I added it to the Wikidata item page as P18 --Gower (talk) 14:36, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-12-10 11:03 (UTC)
Scope: Sicalis luteola luteiventris (Grassland yellow finch)
Support wonderful, very useful --Gower (talk) 14:37, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-10 14:27 (UTC)
Scope: Bath in Siemianowice Śląskie, view from the south
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-10 14:25 (UTC)
Scope: 5 1 Maja Street in Siemianowice Śląskie, view from the northwest
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2025-12-10 14:32 (UTC)
Scope: 16 Kościelna Street in Siemianowice Śląskie, facade
Reason: Cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2025-12-10 15:41 (UTC)
Scope: Beffroi de Douai View from University Street, southwest - Nord - France
Used in: wikidata
@JackyM59: scope clarification should be in English --Gower (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Info Sorry, score updated -- JackyM59 (talk) 20:59, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Alexander-93 (talk) on 2025-12-10 17:14 (UTC)
Scope: Mercedes-AMG G 63 (2024–) - right front view
Used in: de:Mercedes-Benz G-Klasse, uk:Mercedes-Benz G-Клас
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-12-10 23:06 (UTC)
Scope: Fire hall in Calico Ghost Town, view from Ghost Town Rd, Yermo, (CA)
Open for review.

Pending Most valued review candidates

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

This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.