Commons:Valued image candidates

Shortcut: COM:VIC

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: Main VI page Valued image candidates Valued image criteria Valued image scope Valued image value Nomination procedure Review procedure Most Valued Review Promotion rules Valued image closure 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. 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 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

54,463 closed valued image candidates
Closed as				Nominations
Promoted			48,937 (89.9%)
Undecided			3,043 (5.6%)
Declined			2,483 (4.6%)

New valued image nominations

View promotion Nominated by: Pierre André (talk) on 2024-03-15 11:49 (UTC) Scope: Ghost-Sniper (ship, 2005), ENI 02327261, stern  Support best in scope.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose Sorry - IMO this one or this one, better show the stern area of this European inland cargo barge, with better exposure and less background clutter. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)  Comment @GRDN711: Thanks for your advice. the photos one or this one date from 2016, mine is more recent (2024), and it gives the current name of the cargo ship barge, GHOST-SNIPER. --Pierre André (talk) 10:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)  Comment @Pierre André Leclercq: As the ship in your images is named Ghost-Sniper, it is not correctly categorized in this nomination per COM:VICR (6). You need to create Category:Ghost-Sniper (ship, 2005), similar to Category:Oranda (ship, 2005), as a sub-category under the same parent Category:ENI 02327261. Place all your Ghost-Sniper images in this new Category:Ghost-Sniper (ship, 2005) which then becomes the correct scope link category for your nomination. This system for categorizing the thousands of ship images in Wikimedia Commons is described in "How to create a category for a ship" in Category:Ships but may not be easy to understand. Send me a private email if you would like further explanation. The scope would also need to be changed to match the correct ship-by-name. An appropriate scope could be "Ghost-Sniper - ENI 02327261, stern". --GRDN711 (talk) 02:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC) @GRDN711: @Agnes Monkelbaan: Thanks for your advice---- Scope changed from Category:Oranda (ship, 2005) to Ghost-Sniper (ship, 2005) {{{3}}} 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". , --Pierre André (talk) 09:42, 22 March 2024 (UTC) *Okay, I read it. Thank you.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:37, 22 March 2024 (UTC)  Support As Oranda and Ghost-Sniper are the same ship by different names under the same ENI identification number, both Category:Oranda (ship, 2005) and Category:Ghost-Sniper (ship, 2005) should be separate sub-directories under the common parent Category:ENI 02327261. I have corrected this for you and Ghost-Sniper is now correctly categorized per Cateogry:Ships naming conventions. As I now understand your Vi claim, you are saying that this is the best stern view of this Ghost-Sniper ship-by-name and that the ship is uniquely identified. I support this nom.--GRDN711 (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-03-15 16:49 (UTC) Scope: Reformierte Kirche Scuol Tower entrance. Used in: Cultural property of national significance in Switzerland.  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 16 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose If this door had historical value, they would not have inserted a modern lock. Looks recent. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 1 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View Nominated by: Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-03-15 18:44 (UTC) Scope: Mole Costruzione Artigianale 001 - left rear view  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose too dark. cannot see enough detail. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 1 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	Soft focus set Softfocus set to 0 Softfocus set to 1 Softfocus set to 2 View Nominated by: grendel|khan on 2024-03-15 Description: A set of images taken in identical conditions except that the soft focus setting on the lens (a Canon EF 135mm f/2.8 with Softfocus) is changed, to clearly present the setting's effect. VISC of: Soft focus photography We do not have set nominations these days. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 0 support, 0 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2024-03-16 09:04 (UTC) Scope: Entrance to the village of Kashperivka  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose I don't see this as being valuable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-03-16 18:20 (UTC) Scope: Detail of the main entrance of the Reformierte Kirche Zernez Used in: Cultural property of national significance in Switzerland.  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:27, 16 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose This does not appear to be valuable. I don't think the whole door /doorway would either. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:21, 17 March 2024 (UTC)  Support An image of the entire hard-carved door already has a VI rating. IMO, this one as detail is also VI. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Pierre André (talk) on 2024-03-17 10:36 (UTC) Scope: L'Eldorado - Event barge (Lambersart), bow and starboard view.  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose IMO there are problems with this nomination. Per COM:VICR (6) and Category:Ships, the categorization needs to be improved. Per COM:VICR (3), image is cluttered and too dark. --GRDN711 (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)  Comment @GRDN711: , @Archaeodontosaurus: thanks for your advice, brightening the image too dark. ---- Scope changed from L'Eldorado - Péniche évènementielle (Lambersart) to L'Eldorado - Event barge (Lambersart) {{{3}}} 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". , best regards.--Pierre André (talk) 15:59, 20 March 2024 (UTC)  Comment There are at least 1,239,284 images of ships in Commons, and that's not even counting boats, sailing ships, sailboats and barges. If Commons is going to have a collection this large, there has to be structure for categorizing ship images just as there is an organizing lexicon for plant and animal species, shells, insects, airplanes, trains etc. As described in Commons Category:Ships - "How to create a category for a ship", a ship is positively and uniquely identified from the ship name on the hull, the build year and a universal identifying number. This is important as ships can have more than one name. There can also be several ships of the same name, even of the same name built in the same year. For ships, there are 3 universal identifying numbers recognized by Commons in the following order of preference: • IMO ####### (International Maritime Organization; 7-digits; global forever ID - hull number never changes over ship life) is the best identifying number for ships if available. • ENI ######## (European Number of Identification; 8-digits; Europe forever ID - never changes over ship life) – acceptable if IMO# is not available. • MMSI ######### (Maritime Mobile Service Identity; 9-digits; depends on flag state – not global forever; can change in rare cases over ship life – used only if IMO# or ENI# is not available. • If none of above universal identifying numbers are available, Ship-by-Name Category should be named "<name of ship> (ship, <build-year>, <place-of-build> <yard # if available>)". In this case, you made up your own system of categorization through the ship call number that does not match the ship-by-name system that Commons uses. Image is lighter (good) but the nom is incorrectly categorized. I remain opposed. --GRDN711 (talk) 02:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	View promotion Nominated by: Nirmal Dulal (talk) on 2024-03-17 12:41 (UTC) Scope: Oriolus xanthornus (Black-hooded oriole) - in flight please crop... Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2024 (UTC)  Done Thank you. -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 19 March 2024 (UTC)  Support cropped version. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View promotion Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2024-03-18 06:29 (UTC) Scope: Hemicycla distensa, shell, banded form  Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Pierre André (talk) on 2024-03-18 10:56 (UTC) Scope: Laléa - Event barge (Wambrechies), bow and starboard view.  Best in Scope--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose Image has merit but per COM:VICR (6) and Category:Ships (b), the naming of the image scope-link category should match Commons naming policy on ship-by-name categories. Also, would crop tighter to the ship as it is the subject here. Image has a counter-clockwise tilt that needs correction. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)  Comment @GRDN711: , @Agnes Monkelbaan: , thanks for your advice, tilt correction  Done, ---- Scope changed from Laléa - Péniche évènementielle (Wambrechies) to Laléa - Event barge (Wambrechies) {{{3}}} 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". best regards.--Pierre André (talk) 09:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Okay, I read it. Thank you.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC)  Comment The image is fine (thank you for correcting the CCW tilt) but I continue to oppose this ship-by-name image as being incorrectly categorized. --GRDN711 (talk) 02:36, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Pierre André (talk) on 2024-03-18 22:44 (UTC) Scope: Fantasia (ship, 1951), bow view. Open for review.	View promotion Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-19 06:03 (UTC) Scope: Ancient Roman busts in the Museo archeologico nazionale (Venice) - Head of Athena of parthenos type of Phidias  Best in Scope--Famberhorst (talk) 11:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View promotion Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-19 06:04 (UTC) Scope: Ourapteryx sambucaria specimens - female dorsal  Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:27, 19 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View promotion Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-19 06:08 (UTC) Scope: Philip II in armour copy from Titian by Mariano Fortuny y Madrazo - Fortuny Museum  Best in Scope, used and useful. --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2024-03-19 06:22 (UTC) Scope: Scaeochlamys livida (Livid Scallop), right valve  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2024-03-19 09:15 (UTC) Scope: Ascension Church in the village of Sytkivtsi (1826)  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC) To illustrate the category of a temple (it has not been created) - good, to illustrate an entire settlement - not enough --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2024-03-19 14:00 (UTC) Scope: Tsybuliv Ministry School - Central entrance - facade  Support Useful and used --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 16:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Pierre André (talk) on 2024-03-19 22:57 (UTC) Scope: Namoradeiras in Minas Gerais, view from R. do Chafariz,  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Rjcastillo (talk) on 2024-03-20 01:33 (UTC) Scope: Catedral de Ancud - Facade  Support Useful and used --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 16:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-20 06:05 (UTC) Scope: Ancient Roman statues in the Museo archeologico nazionale (Venice) - Fragment of a group with Eros and Psyche  Best in Scope--Famberhorst (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-20 06:07 (UTC) Scope: Ourapteryx sambucaria – mounted specimen female ventral  Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2024-03-20 06:45 (UTC) Scope: Scaeochlamys livida (Livid Scallop), left valve  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: S5A-0043Talk on 2024-03-20 11:34 (UTC) Scope: Front left view of BYD e6 (2nd generation)  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Трифонов Андрей (talk) on 2024-03-20 15:15 (UTC) Scope: Dachnoe (Sudak) and Taraktash (ridge, Sudak) Дачное (Судак) и Таракташ (хребет, Судак) Category:Views of Dachnoe, Crimea Category:Dachne, Sudak Municipality Reason: This photo allows you to create an impression of the village as a whole, inscribed in the natural landscape. The Taraktash rock ridge is clearly visible. Used in 11 wikiprojects -- Трифонов Андрей (talk) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Martinvl (talk) on 2024-03-20 17:08 (UTC) Scope: Drinking fountains in Florence Reason: This drinking foutain, located in Florence next to the Palazzo Vecchi, Piazza della Signoria (about 40 metres from Michealangelo's statue of David) has the city's emblem (a red fleur-de-lis) emblazoned on it. -- Martinvl (talk)  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)  Oppose With such a range of drinking foundations, one cannot be the most valuable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)  Info@Charlesjsharp: This fountain, unlike the four other images in Commons of drinking foutnains in Florence, has the emblem of Florence on it - a red fluer de lis. Martinvl (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2024-03-20 17:53 (UTC) Scope: Iris pseudacorus (yellow flag) - mature fruit .  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2024-03-21 06:16 (UTC) Scope: Hemicycla distensa, shell, spotted form  Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-21 06:24 (UTC) Scope: Ancient Roman busts in the Museo archeologico nazionale (Venice) - Head of Athena, influenced by Skopas  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-21 06:25 (UTC) Scope: Bodhisattva Kannon - Japon fin de la période Edo - Musée Labit  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Palauenc05 (talk) on 2024-03-21 15:15 (UTC) Scope: Wayside cross (1632) in Trier-Ruwer, Germany.  Best in Scope--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:24, 21 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-03-21 18:19 (UTC) Scope: Stations of the Cross in the Kapelle St. Johannes Baptista (Vulpera) Jesus is placed in the tomb.  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-22 05:55 (UTC) Scope: Angerona prunaria specimens – female dorsal  Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-22 06:07 (UTC) Scope: Sigismondo Malatesta medal with Castel Sismondo ("Son of Pandulfus" version) by Matteo de' Pasti  Best in Scope--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2024-03-22 06:25 (UTC) Scope: Hemicycla distensa, shell, unicoloured form  Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:45, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2024-03-22 09:01 (UTC) Scope: Church of the Intercession in the village Letychivka, Ukraine  Comment a correction of perspective would be desirable. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: --Thi (talk) 20:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC) on 2024-03-22 20:23 (UTC) Scope: Theophrastus redivivus - First page Used in: en:Theophrastus redivivus  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: --Thi (talk) 20:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC) on 2024-03-22 20:27 (UTC) Scope: The System of Nature by Jean-Baptiste de MIRABAUD - Cover page  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: --Thi (talk) 20:30, 22 March 2024 (UTC) on 2024-03-22 20:30 (UTC) Scope: Denis Diderot - Louis-Michel van Loo - Louvre RF 1958 Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: --Thi (talk) 20:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC) on 2024-03-22 20:38 (UTC) Scope: Portrait of man with bust of Denis Diderot – painting by Jean-Simon Berthélemy  Comment Need artist's name in scope. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Added (Jean-Simon Berthélemy). --Thi (talk) 22:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: --Thi (talk) 20:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC) on 2024-03-22 20:41 (UTC) Scope: Portrait of Jeremy Bentham (Pickersgill) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-23 05:53 (UTC) Scope: Crucifixion and Saints - Venetian-Byzantine painter (mid-14th century) - Museo Correr Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-03-23 05:59 (UTC) Scope: Angerona prunaria – female ventral  Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2024-03-23 06:11 (UTC) Scope: Decatopecten radula (Radula Scallop), right valve  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Nirmal Dulal (talk) on 2024-03-23 06:30 (UTC) Scope: Alcippe nipalensis (Nepal Fulvetta) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Nirmal Dulal (talk) on 2024-03-23 06:46 (UTC) Scope: (Yellow-breasted Bunting) - in flight Open for review.

Pending Most valued review candidates

Portrait of Vicente Guerrero

Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) on 2021-01-21 17:47 (UTC) Scope: Retrato Vicente Guerrero por Anacleto Escutia en Palacio Nacional (Mexico) (Portrait of Vicente Guerrero by Anacleto Escutia in Palacio Nacional (Mexico)) Previous reviews  Comment Good image, good caption, but the scope is too imprecise (it can be improved) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:48, 22 January 2021 (UTC) @Archaeodontosaurus:  Done the scope has changed--Aurelio de Sandoval (talk)  Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:26, 23 January 2021 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: ErickTErick (talk) on 2023-10-31 21:45 (UTC) Scope: Retrato póstumo del presidente Vicente Guerrero en el Museo Nacional de Historia, Ciudad de México (Posthumous portrait of President Vicente Guerrero in the National Museum of History, Mexico City) Reason: The version of this image which currently considered the most valuable within its scope is of much lower quality than this newer version. In addition, the name given to the scope is factually wrong about the location of the painting (it is not within Palacio Nacional) and Mexico's Spanish name is misspelled (it's México, not Mexico). -- ErickTErick (talk)  Comment There is already an image promoted in VI: you have to go to Pending Most valued review candidates --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)  Done Started MVR ErickTErick (talk) 19:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach

Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Ezarateesteban on 2023-11-26 22:02 (UTC) Scope: El Aficionado by Antonio Casanova y Estorach  Comment The original file is the .tiff : File:El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach.tiff. Everypeople can create a better processed image from this file. So what are we suposed to do ? --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC) I am doing it according this reccomendation Ezarateesteban 23:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Ezarateesteban on 2023-11-26 22:00 (UTC) Scope: El Aficionado by Antonio Casanova y Estorach  Comment The original file is the .tiff : File:El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach.tiff. Everypeople can create a better processed image from this file. So what are we suposed to do ? --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Anciens bains municipaux de Colmar

Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Gzen92 [discuter] on 2018-01-22 12:21 (UTC) Scope: Exterior of anciens bains municipaux (Colmar)  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:18, 26 January 2018 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Gzen92 (talk) on 2023-12-29 07:22 (UTC) Scope: Exterior of anciens bains municipaux (Colmar)  Comment The light on the cble is a bit distracting. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC)  Support The cable is distracing in the current VI too. The people are distracing here, but light and crop are superior. --Milseburg (talk) 18:26, 14 February 2024 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 06:47, 21 March 2024 (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

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