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

59,185 closed valued image candidates
Closed as		Nominations
Promoted	53,364 (90.2%)
Undecided	3,275 (5.5%)
Declined	2,546 (4.3%)

New valued image nominations

View
Nominated by: Milseburg (talk) on 2025-06-03 14:01 (UTC)
Scope: Vosges, seen from Views from Trommturm
Used in: de:Tromm
Reason: Rare distant view of 174 km -- Milseburg (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Oppose This image is too dark, making it difficult to see this unique features of the view. --GRDN711 (talk) 00:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] @GRDN711: This could be discussed in "Pending Most Valued Review Candidates" if a better-quality image were available. But none exists because the conditions for such shots are rare. You can't just walk up and take photos. This is the only image showing the Vosges from this location.It is already visible in the full-screen version, and you can see it clearly in full resolution. The difficult visibility at such great distances is the nature of things and right the point here. What's remarkable is, that it even managed to provide photographic evidence that the Vosges can be seen from here. That's why it's valuable. Such distant views often don't occur in sunlight. It have to be authentic. I consider technical manipulation to increase visibility inappropriate. --Milseburg (talk) 10:27, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Milseburg: My oppose is not that complicated. Per VICR (3), a valued image must illustrate its subject well. IMO this image is too dark such that its unique qualities are not readily visible. Lighten the image so that details are more visible and I will reconsider my vote. The alternative is to gather more support from others. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] @GRDN711: Hmm, the subject I'm trying to illustrate isn't the Vosges Mountains. They're easier to photograph from a shorter distance. The subject is the long-distance view of the Vosges Mountains from this location (Trommtower). I think that's to see well enogh. With such subjects, contrast is more important than brightness. --Milseburg (talk) 19:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 1 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View
Nominated by: Milseburg (talk) on 2025-06-03 13:58 (UTC)
Scope: Rhön, seen from Views from Trommturm
Used in: de:Tromm
Reason: Rare distant view of 120 km to the Rhön Mountains. -- Milseburg (talk)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Oppose This image is too dark, making it difficult to see this unique features of the view. --GRDN711 (talk) 00:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] @GRDN711: This could be discussed in "Pending Most Valued Review Candidates" if a better-quality image were available. But none exists because the conditions for such shots are rare. You can't just walk up and take photos. This is the best image showing the Rhön from this location.It is already visible in the full-screen version, and you can see it clearly in full resolution. The difficult visibility at such great distances is the nature of things and right the point here. What's remarkable is, that they even managed to provide photographic evidence that the Rhön can be seen from here. That's why it's valuable. Such distant views often don't occur in sunlight. It have to be authentic. I consider technical manipulation to increase visibility inappropriate. --Milseburg (talk) 10:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment as previous. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] @GRDN711: Answer as previous. --Milseburg (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 1 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-06-03 07:56 (UTC)
Scope: Marktstraße 45 (Landau in der Pfalz), facade
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-06 07:13 (UTC)
Scope: Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Yurkivka (Uman Raion)
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:48, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-06 07:17 (UTC)
Scope: Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Yarovatka
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:38, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-06 15:38 (UTC)
Scope: Lepidocolaptes lacrymiger aequatorialis (Montane woodcreeper) eating moth
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:39, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-06 15:40 (UTC)
Scope: Cyanocorax yncas yncas (Inca jay) head
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-06 15:43 (UTC)
Scope: Cyanocorax yncas yncas (Inca jay)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-06-06 16:23 (UTC)
Scope: Town hall of Forest-sur-Marque, view from Rue Principale
Used in: Global usage
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-06-07 04:42 (UTC)
Scope: Sculptures Sur En, Sent. PIKORUA - Die Wege des Lebens. Artwork Carmen Cotti.
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:10, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-07 05:15 (UTC)
Scope: Pomona by Giovanni marchiori - Museo civico di Santa Caterina
Support Useful and used —Nikride (talk) 08:10, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-07 05:18 (UTC)
Scope: **Bombus pascuorum on Lavandula angustifolia**
Support Useful and used —Nikride (talk) 08:10, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-07 08:08 (UTC)
Scope: Synytsia Park in Cherkasy Oblast, Ukraine
Comment Not sure I am going to vote for this image, but given this is a small o\park, the scope needs to better identify the location. Suggest "Synytsia Park in Cherkasy Oblast, Ukraine". Also, there are 3 or 4 similar images. Why do you believe this one best shows the park? --GRDN711 (talk) 00:23, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] This photo clearly shows an ancient column, two paths, and trees. --Nikride (talk) 10:11, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-07 08:09 (UTC)
Scope: Synytsia Stone Bridge - view from the south
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-07 09:12 (UTC)
Scope: Tangara velia iridina (Opal-rumped tanager)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-07 09:15 (UTC)
Scope: Euphonia xanthogaster quitensis (Orange-bellied euphonia)
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:27, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-07 09:16 (UTC)
Scope: Myiarchus cephalotes cephalotes (Pale-edged flycatcher)
Support Useful and used.--Pierre André ^(talk) 08:27, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Acroterion (talk) 17:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC) on 2025-06-07 17:46 (UTC)[reply]
Scope: Tatoosh Range looking south
Comment It would be good to put the view orientation. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] I've added an orientation "looking south" Acroterion (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support You have to put it in scope - Ok now. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: GRDN711 (talk) on 2025-06-08 00:06 (UTC)
Scope: Carnival Luminosa – IMO 9398905
Reason: Best view of this ship by name. -- GRDN711 (talk)
Comment Can you straighten the horizon? It's leaning to the left.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:38, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment The boat too! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment Thank you for your comments. Sorry - not too many vertical lines in this image and I did not see the tilt. Have implemented a correction. See if this helps. --GRDN711 (talk) 16:02, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support Useful and used. For me ok. Thank you for correction.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:28, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-08 04:32 (UTC)
Scope: Warrior head by Antonio Zanchi - Museo civico di Santa Caterina - Treviso
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:18, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-08 05:02 (UTC)
Scope: Barian celestine. Basse Normandie France.
Support Useful and used —Nikride (talk) 10:03, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-06-08 06:15 (UTC)
Scope: Trier, Dom Saint-Pierre, cathédrale de Trèves. Detail of the exterior. (Steel riveted side door)
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-08 09:55 (UTC)
Scope: Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Synytsia (Uman Raion)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-06-08 15:33 (UTC)
Scope: Coats of arms related to the House of Cock.- Saint-Peter church of Flers, view from Rue Jeanne d'Arc (Fr)
Best in Scope. Maybe centering would be nicer.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:33, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-08 21:25 (UTC)
Scope: Thraupis palmarum violilavata (Palm tanager)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-08 21:26 (UTC)
Scope: Ocreatus peruanus (Peruvian racket-tail) male in flight
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-08 21:27 (UTC)
Scope: Ocreatus peruanus (Peruvian racket-tail) female in flight
Support Useful and used. --GRDN711 (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: CtasACT^(talk) on 2025-09-08 12:03 (UTC)
Scope: Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia, view from Haile Selassie I stadium (Et)
Oppose I see two differents people here. So both of them should be in the scope IMHO. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 17:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-06-09 04:38 (UTC)
Scope: Sculptures Sur En, Sent. Crepun Grischun - 2024. Artwork Peter Gredig.
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-09 04:39 (UTC)
Scope: Prometheus with the Mirror and the Eagle by Francesco Maffei
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-09 04:43 (UTC)
Scope: Rhagonycha fulva (Common red soldier beetle) - Male specimen dorsal view
Support Useful —Nikride (talk) 07:49, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-09 07:44 (UTC)
Scope: Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Kolodyste, Uman Raion (near the sugar factory)
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:29, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-09 07:45 (UTC)
Scope: Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Kolodyste, Uman Raion (near the club)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-06-09 09:17 (UTC)
Scope: Water wells in Gerberoy, view from Rue Henri le Sidaner (Fr)
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-09 09:36 (UTC)
Scope: Urosticte benjamini (Purple-bibbed whitetip) female
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-09 09:41 (UTC)
Scope: Paroaria gularis gularis (Red-capped cardinal) in flight
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-09 09:38 (UTC)
Scope: Urosticte benjamini (Purple-bibbed whitetip) male in flight
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: GRDN711 (talk) on 2025-06-09 20:48 (UTC)
Scope: Geococcyx californianus (Greater roadrunner) – young adult male
Reason: Best view of a young adult male of this species. View is at bird level. Good eye contact. Comb is up indicating concern and interest. Rocky background is typical camouflage for this species in the Mojave Desert. -- GRDN711 (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-06-10 04:24 (UTC)
Scope: Sculpture on Bolsward ‘De Vleermuis’. Artwork by Johan Creten.
Comment The scope is poorly chosen. It's the statue that is represented, not the sculptor... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Done. Scope adjusted. Thanks for the review.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:54, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support pefect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-10 04:57 (UTC)
Scope: Bertoldino flying with the geese by Antonio Diziani - Pinacoteca Egidio Martini
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:28, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-10 04:59 (UTC)
Scope: **Stenurella melanura male on Rubus ulmifolius**
Support Useful and used —Nikride (talk) 07:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-10 07:10 (UTC)
Scope: Church of the Intercession in Ryzhavka (Uman Raion)
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-10 07:12 (UTC)
Scope: Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Ryzhavka (Uman Raion)
Support Useful and used. --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:28, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-06-10 10:34 (UTC)
Scope: Carved wood of 1768 on the portal of the Claeys castle (Ascq), view from Rue Gaston Baratte
Used in: Global usage
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-06-10 11:41 (UTC)
Scope: Beurre & Oeufs (Paris)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-10 20:32 (UTC)
Scope: Megaceryle torquata (Ringed kingfisher) male in flight
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-10 20:33 (UTC)
Scope: Platalea ajaja (Roseate spoonbill) young adult
Support Useful and used —Nikride (talk) 08:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-06-10 20:35 (UTC)
Scope: Euphonia rufiventris rufiventris (Rufous-bellied euphonia) female
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2025-06-11 04:17 (UTC)
Scope: Broerekerk (Bolsward) (Tombstone from 1632.)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-11 04:52 (UTC)
Scope: Apollo and the Cuman Sibyl by Gerolamo Forabosco
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2025-06-11 05:00 (UTC)
Scope: **Micromus angulatus (common green lacewing) on Daucus carota**
Support Useful and used —Nikride (talk) 08:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-11 08:09 (UTC)
Scope: Ivakhny - Church of the Holy Martyr Paraskeva (view from the northwest)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Nikride (talk) on 2025-06-11 08:12 (UTC)
Scope: Ivakhny - School
Open for review.

Pending Most valued review candidates

hamster

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 08:19, 9 June 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)
Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply] Support Proposed image is definitely the better VI of the two. While this one shows the paws a little better, proposed image has better overall quality and more valuable. --GRDN711 (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply] Best in Scope —Nikride (talk) 07:57, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Acridotheres ginginianus nests

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Moheen ^{(keep talking)} on 2025-04-27 22:22 (UTC)
Scope: Acridotheres ginginianus nests
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Moheen ^{(keep talking)} on 2025-04-27 22:22 (UTC)
Scope: Acridotheres ginginianus nests
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Au chat barré, ancien estaminet avenue du Peuple Belge (Lille)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-04-24 21:44 (UTC)
Scope: *Old tavern Au chat barré* avenue du Peuple Belge, Lille, view from Parc Louise de Bettignies**
Best in Scope--Famberhorst (talk) 05:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply] Oppose In favour of the intended replacement. Light is inferior here. --Milseburg (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-05-05 19:15 (UTC)
Scope: Au chat barré, ancien estaminet avenue du Peuple Belge (Lille)
Reason: Perspective is ok on this one. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:31, 5 May 2025 (UTC) -- Sebring12Hrs (talk)[reply]
Support Light and colors are superior. --Milseburg (talk) 14:10, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Immeuble, 31 rue de Gand (Lille)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-04-25 15:29 (UTC)
Scope: Renaissance house, rue de Gand 31, Lille, view from rue des Tours
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:51, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-05-05 19:29 (UTC)
Scope: Immeuble, 31 rue de Gand (Lille)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Hôtel du Juge Garde des Monnaies

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2025-04-27 16:53 (UTC)
Scope: Hôtel du Juge Garde des Monnaies, 61-63, rue de la Monnaie (Vieux-Lille), view from 28 Rue de la Monnaie
Used in: Global usage
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2025-05-05 19:09 (UTC)
Scope: Hôtel du Juge Garde des Monnaies, Lille
Reason: The left facade is visible from this view. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 06:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC) -- Sebring12Hrs (talk)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

bats

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charles (talk) on 2015-08-05 13:39 (UTC)
Scope: Rhynchonycteris naso (Long-nosed proboscis bats)
Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] `Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC)`[reply] Oppose In favour of the intended replacement. Quality is overall inferior here.--Milseburg (talk) 14:17, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2025-05-06 15:53 (UTC)
Scope: Rhynchonycteris naso (Long-nosed proboscis bats)
Reason: I use a better camera these days! -- Charlesjsharp (talk)
Support Quality is overall superior. --Milseburg (talk) 14:16, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 08:19, 9 June 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

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