Jump to content

Commons talk:Featured picture candidates

Add topic
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Featured picture candidates.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
candidate list

For procedural questions about featured pictures (FP) or featured picture candidates (FPC), please read the complete rules and image guidelines before posting here. Most of your questions have answers on those pages.

For unfamiliar photography-related words and expressions used on FPC, also see Photography terms.


FPCBot asking for help

[edit]
Latest comment: 12 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The bot program could not infer the subject of the nomination Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2007 Pilatus PC-12 N777JZ at Mariposa Yosemite Airport photo Don Ramey Logan.jpg, therefore it adds the nomination to the maintenance category Category:2026 featured picture candidates without subject. Please replace that category by the appropriate annual archive category for the subject of the nomination. Thank you! / FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

✓ Done The correct archival category ‘by subject’ is Category:2026 featured picture candidates of vehicles. The nomination did not contain a usable gallery link, so no wonder that the bot could not infer the category. – Aristeas (talk) 09:39, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
[edit]
Latest comment: 6 days ago10 comments5 people in discussion

Once again we have a lot of recent featured pictures (FPs) which were not added to the correct section on a gallery page, but to the ‘Unsorted’ section. Therefore the FP gallery pages now look rather untidy, and this will get worse and worse if we don’t sort these FPs.

In the past Cart, me and some others used to sort all these images manually into the right section, but in order to minimize this tedious job I have put a lot of work into the improvement of FPCBot, so that the bot now sorts most images correctly into the right section; only images with nonsensical gallery links are still added to the ‘Unsorted’ section. Furthermore, I regularly inspect all gallery links on the candidate list and try to fix any broken links in advance, so that the bot has no problems to sort any newly promoted FPs right into the correct section. Therefore I do not feel like sorting all these unsorted FPs into the correct sections; I am not responsible for that these images have been dumped into the ‘Unsorted’ sections instead of sorting them correctly; it was not FPCBot who did that.

Therefore I ask all experienced and willing FPC regulars: Please sort your and some other FPs into the correct sections on the gallery pages. @Cmao20, Giles Laurent, Poco a poco, Radomianin, Tisha Mukherjee, and Wilfredor: and everybody else: Could you please help to sort all these unsorted FPs? If you need help or explanations how to do this, just comment below or drop me a note. Thank you very very much!

Many thanks to everybody who helps with this job! All the best, – Aristeas (talk) 16:06, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  • Well, I am doing them now, but I do have to say that in a good many of these cases the gallery links in the nominations seem to be correct and I don't know why the bot thinks they are nonsense and can't interpret them. Cmao20 (talk) 16:08, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
    • Many thanks, Cmao20! You are right, in most cases the gallery links in these nominations are correct. FPCBot would have interpreted these links correctly, of course, but it was not FPCBot who added these images to the ‘Unsorted’ sections. If it was FPCBot who made these mistakes I would have fixed all of them myself, of course, as I accept responsibility for FPCBot. We have got new tools, and new tools introduce cool new features, but also new bugs. – Aristeas (talk) 16:18, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
    • Ah, I see! I was wondering why some of my recent nominations have had 'nomination successful' messages posted by tools that are not FPCBot on my talk page. This explains it quite well. Someone probably needs to take a look at that tool before the problem continues to grow, as it is evidently incapable of dealing with many lengthy gallery links. Of course you should not feel obligated to do it, as you did not make it. Cmao20 (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Alright, I think they are all done, thanks to Radomianin for doing the rest, I think you started from the end as I started from the beginning. Anyway, I think we should stress that in almost every case this was not at all the fault of the nominator. In all the ones I did, which must have been several dozen, I found only two examples where the nominator specified the wrong gallery. All of Poco's, Charles's, Giles's, Tisha's, Llez's, Ermell's, and mine, were correct. So in virtually every case this is a failure of this new tool, and FPCBot would have been able to sort them correctly and would have saved us a lot of work. This work will pile up again unless this tool is fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Looks like you were a little faster than me this time :) I started from the bottom while you worked from the top, so together we got the job done. Many thanks to Aristeas as well for compiling the list and coordinating the whole effort. That made it much easier to tackle. I also hope the new tool, which is valuable and efficient overall, can be improved to eliminate this limitation. Once this issue is fixed, it should save everyone a lot of unnecessary manual work in the future. Many thanks to everyone who helped! Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 17:14, 16 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Yes, it’s already done. Sorry, Poco a poco, Giles Laurent and Tisha Mukherjee for pinging you! I assumed we need the help of a lot of people to sort all these images, therefore I pinged you, but Cmao20 and Radomianin have worked like beavers (I hope this is the correct idiom, if not: sorry), so everything is already done.
Good news: My utility program fpgallerist has checked all gallery pages again and finds neither unsorted FPs nor duplicate nor missing entries, so the action was a complete success. Many thanks again to Cmao20 and Radomianin! Best, – Aristeas (talk) 09:20, 17 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
I was a bit busy in real life and arrived a little late; just a quick note of thanks to Aristeas for spotting it and to everyone who contributed. Wilfredor (talk) 00:30, 20 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
[edit]
Latest comment: 8 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

From time to time a featured picture gallery page gets too crowded and becomes unclear. If only a specific section of the gallery page contains too many entries, it makes sense to move these entries to a new gallery (sub)page, just as it has been done many times before (cf. e.g.). I noticed that the section for Germany on Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings contained more than 100 photos and looked really overcrowded. Therefore I have created a new gallery (sub)page, Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings/Germany, for FPs of religious buildings in Germany. This also made it possible to sort the images by federal state and, within those states, by city. As a result, images of the same churches or nearby buildings are now grouped together, allowing one to see at a glance, for example, which FPs we have of Cologne Cathedral or the churches in Munich. I will look out for other overcrowded gallery pages and split them if necessary and when I find the time (because this is a job which needs to be done slowly and carefully). Hope it helps, – Aristeas (talk) 19:26, 17 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  • Thank you very much, Aristeas, for this careful and useful improvement. The new gallery page makes the collection much clearer and easier to browse. I would also like to thank you for your ongoing work on maintaining and improving the gallery pages in general. This kind of work often happens quietly in the background, but it is very important for keeping Commons organised and making our FP galleries enjoyable to explore. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:20, 17 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Rules change

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Based on our previous conversation (per consensus at Commons talk:FPC "Three small rule updates for FPC"), I have added a disclosure requirement for AI-generated content, rule 3 only; rules 1 and 2 did not gain consensus Wilfredor (talk) 14:40, 20 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

IA image detector

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

For text, https://gptzero.me/ is very well known, and for images, I am testing https://www.zerogpt.com/ai-image-detector, incidentally, detected that an image currently on FPC is fake. I would like to know your opinions on this tool and whether we can really trust it. Wilfredor (talk) 01:15, 21 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Brown Parrotbill in Darjeeling May 2025 by Tisha Mukherjee 01

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

For this nomination I wanted to insert an image link but the image is showing instead of link, can anyone fix it please? Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 05:15, 22 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

✓ Done For the record: Done by Yann, many thanks! – Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 22 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments3 people in discussion
One of the first featured pictures from a park – technically not as perfect as our newest FPs, but still a very nice composition

One of the most obvious gaps in our Featured picture galleries was the lack of a gallery page for featured pictures (FPs) from gardens, parks and other artificial green spaces. (With “parks”, I mean city parks, palace parks and other planned parks, not national parks and nature parks which protect natural landscapes.) The Natural Scenes gallery pages are only for FPs from natural landscapes. Therefore FPs from gardens and parks were scattered across many gallery pages – Places/Other, Natural Scenes, Natural Phenomena, Palaces, Bridges, Roads, Cityscapes, … –, often with pictures of the same park being split up between two or three gallery pages.

This was an unsatisfactory situation, and so I have created a new gallery page for FPs from gardens and parks. It includes also some buildings which are traditionally considered an important part of garden architecture – garden houses, pavilions, gazebos, follies, greenhouses, orangeries, bridges etc. –, provided the FPs show them as part of a garden or park. One can certainly debate whether some particular images belong into this gallery or into another one; it’s sometimes difficult to draw the line. But overall, the new gallery page is a significant improvement: it offers a good overview of our FPs of horticulture, garden art and garden architecture, and also brings together similar images of the same location that were previously kept separate. I hope that we get used to the new gallery page and discover the advantages it offers.

One such advantage is that the new gallery page also highlights what we lack. For example, we have plenty of FPs from gardens and parks in Germany, but only few from France and Great Britain, despite the magnificent parks in these countries; we have some excellent FPs from Japan and South Korea, but their number is small if we consider the wonderful garden culture of these countries; and apparently we have not a single FP from parks and gardens in China – which seems almost unbelievable when we think of the fantastic parks and gardens in that country. We can see this as an invitation to browse our photos of gardens and parks in these countries and to look out for potential FP candidates; and anyone who visits these countries could take the opportunity to bring us back some excellent pictures from their gardens and parks – thank you very much! – Aristeas (talk) 20:08, 24 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Good idea, thank you! Achim Lammerts • Syntaxys (talk) 06:01, 25 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons_talk:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=1251709588"