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

46,270 closed valued image candidates
Closed as				Nominations
Promoted			41,302 (89.3%)
Undecided			2,639 (5.7%)
Declined			2,329 (5%)

New valued image nominations

View Nominated by: Ασμοδαίος (talk) on 2021-11-28 10:44 (UTC) Scope: Souliotes Used in: el:Σουλιώτες, en:Albanians Reason: Per Murawska-Muthesius, Imaging and Mapping Eastern Europe (Routledge, 2021), pp. 77-79, among the "series of iconic images of Albania's mountains, peopled by the invincible palikars, the inhabitants of the impassable Suli summits" this watercolour is "one of the most striking images" that "sums up the agility, belligerence, and an almost animal-like alterness of the warrios" and "proved hugely popular in Europe throughout the nineteenth century". Per KCL website, it matches "exactly the dress and armament of the Souliots". Outside Wikimedia projects, a version of this image has been used as the cover image for an important scientific monograph on the Souliots. -- Ασμοδαίος (talk)  Comment The guidelines will explain how you have to link to a category in the scope. It's not an easy process, but best to copy what others do. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:11, 28 November 2021 (UTC)  Info Done. Ασμοδαίος (talk) 12:38, 28 November 2021 (UTC) Result: 0 support, 0 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Ezarateesteban on 2021-11-29 11:10 (UTC) Scope: Osteospermum ecklonis (Cape marguerite), flower  Comment The binomial always in italics followed by the vernacular name in English in parenthesis. The scope must be reduced to: flower, the only part presented here.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2021 (UTC)  Done --Ezarateesteban 17:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)  Oppose There are in our galleries other pictures of this flower better than the present one -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:15, 29 November 2021 (UTC)  Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)  Support OK for me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2021 (UTC)  Comment Sorry to insist, but there are at least 4 images better than the present one: this, this, this and this. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:35, 2 December 2021 (UTC)  Oppose Per Alvesgaspar. This other image is used in many articles, the candidate is not used. --Tagooty (talk) 15:49, 3 December 2021 (UTC)  Comment VIC is not a place to rubberstamp existing usage in Wikipedia. We are supposed to judge for ourselves which image in scope would be best to use, whether or not it is currently used. How would a better photo ever get introduced, otherwise? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Oppose That point having been made, I agree with Alvesgaspar: Those four other photos are better in scope than this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Why don't nominate another of this scope or create a set of pictures to choose one? Ezarateesteban 21:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Go ahead. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 12:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
View promotion Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2021-12-01 18:16 (UTC) Scope: Laccaria amethystina  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View promotion Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-02 05:20 (UTC) Scope: Oorlogsmonument door Lajos Gyorfi. against the N.H. church, Hattem.  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 2 December 2021 (UTC)  Support Best in scope. --August Geyler (talk) 12:18, 2 December 2021 (UTC) Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View promotion Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-02 06:09 (UTC) Scope: Le Salon des Cents, lithographie EAL pour l'affiche 1896 - Henry Detouche - Lithography  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View promotion Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-02 06:09 (UTC) Scope: Vierge à l'Enfant remettant les clefs à Saint-Pierre (Virgin and Child handing over the keys to Saint-Pierre) Jacques Blanchard  Support best in scope.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:40, 2 December 2021 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View promotion Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-02 06:11 (UTC) Scope: Kentrochrysalis streckeri specimen, male dorsal  Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 07:14, 2 December 2021 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2021-12-02 07:11 (UTC) Scope: Vokesimurex rectirostris (Erect-spined Murex), shell  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:18, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 12:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: August Geyler (talk) on 2021-12-02 12:12 (UTC) Scope: Railwaybridge Lieselotte-Herrmann-Str. in Leipzig under reconstruction Used in: wikidata:Q109878826 Reason: The best image in scope, showing the complete building under reconstruction. -- August Geyler (talk)  Comment As the best picture of the complete building, I would wish it without the barrier. The scope of the presented photo should be changed, for example "Barrier at the Railwaybridge …" -- Spurzem ([[User talk:Spurzem|  Thank you.  Done As this building is under reconstruction I changed the scope as suggested. --August Geyler (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC) talk]]) 20:54, 2 December 2021 (UTC)  Support. Good and useful -- Spurzem (talk) 08:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 12:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Gzen92 [discuter] on 2021-12-02 13:22 (UTC) Scope: Patinoire de Colmar  Support Best in scope. --August Geyler (talk) 13:29, 2 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Andreas Stiasny (talk) on 2021-12-02 15:00 (UTC) Scope: Fritz Benesch memorial on the mountain Rax in Lower Austria Used in: Wikidata: Q1465682  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:22, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Spurzem (talk) on 2021-12-02 15:31 (UTC) Scope: Altes Rathaus Andernach: Sculpture of “Anna Selbdritt” (Virgin and Child with Saint Anne) from the middle of the 16th century, corbel and baldachin renewed in 1901  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 23:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Jaqen (talk) on 2021-12-02 16:09 (UTC) Scope: Dr. Pira Used in: it:Dottor Pira, d:Q24284325 Reason: Best in scope, imho. -- Jaqen (talk)  Support Best in scope. --August Geyler (talk) 22:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Spurzem (talk) on 2021-12-02 19:51 (UTC) Scope: Station of the cross in Hochstraße (Andernach), heavily weathered tuff relief, dated 1499  Support best in scope.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:20, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-03 05:24 (UTC) Scope: Chiesetta di Malga Mare  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-03 06:04 (UTC) Scope: Femme assise - Lithography by Maxime Dethomas 1900  Support Useful --Llez (talk) 07:08, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-03 06:06 (UTC) Scope: Choir of the Ste Cecil Cathedral - Ceiling  Support Useful and often used -- Spurzem (talk) 09:41, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-03 06:08 (UTC) Scope: Le Printemps (étude pour la Mairie de Bagnolet), Spring (Study for Bagnolet Town Hall) by Henri Rachou  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:37, 3 December 2021 (UTC)  Comment The crop is strange. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC) This one is not the weirdest: the author wanted to frame his works himself and claimed this point, there are several to come, this one is not bad ... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Nafiur14 (talk) on 2021-12-03 07:06 (UTC) Scope: Shaheed Minar  Comment This image seems to be the one that best describes the monument. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2021-12-03 07:06 (UTC) Scope: Helix figulina, shell  Support Best in scope and used. --Tagooty (talk) 15:52, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: August Geyler (talk) on 2021-12-03 10:48 (UTC) Scope: Multiple dwelling Zweinaundorfer Straße with protective net Used in: List of cultural heritage monuments in Leipzig Reason: Best image showing the complete building as it is since 2009 until today. -- August Geyler (talk)  Comment I would not always praise myself, but leave it to others to judge whether it is the best image. In the rest I see a picture of a protective net, less of a building or multiple dwelling. Perhaps you should modify the scope here too. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 13:27, 3 December 2021 (UTC)  Done I did not want praise anything. I only wanted to describe the reason for nominating this.  Thank you. I changed the scope as mentioned. --August Geyler (talk) 15:00, 3 December 2021 (UTC)  Support Useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 20:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)  Support --Tagooty (talk) 03:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Spurzem (talk) on 2021-12-03 11:22 (UTC) Scope: Immaculata by Joseph Ignaz Saler from 1746/47 in Jesuitenkirche Mannheim Used in: de: Josef Ignaz Saler, de: Jesuitenkirche (Mannheim)  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:32, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2021-12-03 17:29 (UTC) Scope: Grote Kerk (Hindeloopen) National monument. Wooden door (South side).  Support Beautiful and useful -- Spurzem (talk) 19:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: August Geyler (talk) on 2021-12-03 22:45 (UTC) Scope: Herrnhuter Straße 2 Used in: wikidata:Q49287320  Support Best in scope and used. --Tagooty (talk) 03:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Comment I fixed the scope. "Category" should not be visible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:09, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Tagooty (talk) on 2021-12-03 15:37 (UTC) Scope: Rhododendron campanulatum (Pink rhododendron) inflorescence Used in: en:Himachal Pradesh • en:Rhododendron • en:List of Indian state flowers • en:List of Indian state symbols • fr:Emblème de l'Inde • hi:भारतीय राज्यों व केंद्रशासित प्रदेशों के प्रतीकों की सूची • simple:Himachal Pradesh  Comment The scope must be modified: it is not a flower but an inflorescence that is presented. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Done @Archaeodontosaurus: Thanks for the feedback. --Tagooty (talk) 08:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-04 05:46 (UTC) Scope: La belle juive fait ses courses - Hermann-Paul (The beautiful Jewess goes shopping)  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:00, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-04 05:48 (UTC) Scope: Le repentir de saint Pierre (The repentance of Saint Peter), Anonymous, 17th century  Comment Please fix the scope and include "Anonymous, 17th-century". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Done Indeed the name of the file was in place of the scope; Thank you. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:15, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-04 05:50 (UTC) Scope: Le pont de Tounis par Raymond Pujol in Musée du Vieux Toulouse  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-04 05:57 (UTC) Scope: Kapelle St. Jakob/Caplutta Sogn Giacun, statue on the altar, right.  Comment At least in my usage, this is a statue, not a picture, which would mean either a painting or photograph. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Done. Correction. Thanks for your reviews--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Support Nice and useful angel. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:41, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Support per Spurzem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-04 06:04 (UTC) Scope: Nicolaaskerk, Hemelum, north west side.  Best in Scope and useful. I'd use "northwest side," but that's American English. "North west side" is probably fine (I don't think British English requires a hyphen in "north-west", but if it does, someone will correct me). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Thank you for the correction.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:38, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Support Used and useful -- Spurzem (talk) 13:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Palauenc05 (talk) on 2021-12-04 13:31 (UTC) Scope: Silk bookmark of the 1933 pilgrimage to the Holy Robe of Jesus in the Cathedral of Trier.  Support Meanwhile rare and useful -- Spurzem (talk) 13:45, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Spurzem (talk) on 2021-12-04 13:52 (UTC) Scope: Dome of the Christuskirche Mannheim, view form northwest Used in: nl: Christuskerk (Mannheim)  Support Best image in scope and used. --August Geyler (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2021-12-04 16:38 (UTC) Scope: Flower buds of a Lonicera  Support Very good, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 16:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)  Comment The month is not material to the scope. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Palauenc05 (talk) on 2021-12-04 16:42 (UTC) Scope: Former Moselbahn locomotive repair shop in Andel (Bernkastel-Kues), Germany, in the 1930s.  Support Very useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-05 05:33 (UTC) Scope: Cross on the wall. (Kapelle St. Martin/Caplutta Sogn Martin)  Support. Good and useful -- Spurzem (talk) 11:20, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-05 05:36 (UTC) Scope: City pump on the Market in Hattem.  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-05 05:46 (UTC) Scope: Femme Assise dans un parc (Woman Sitting in a Park) by Maxime Dethomas  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-05 05:48 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Sainte-Cécile - La sainte famille avec sainte Anne et saint Jean-Baptiste - Karsten van Limbos (The holy family with Saint Anne and Saint John the Baptist)  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:27, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-05 05:50 (UTC) Scope: Kentrochrysalis streckeri specimen male ventral  Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 07:37, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2021-12-05 07:35 (UTC) Scope: Glycymeris cor, shell  Support best in scope.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:29, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Spurzem (talk) on 2021-12-05 13:45 (UTC) Scope: Jesuitenkirche Mannheim, view from notheast Used in: de: Jesuit Church, Mannheim  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: August Geyler (talk) on 2021-12-05 17:44 (UTC) Scope: Remains of the siding of the former bookbindery machine factory "Karl Krause" in Leipzig Reason: This image can show what remains today of that infrastructure, abandoned 30 years ago. -- August Geyler (talk) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Palauenc05 (talk) on 2021-12-05 17:51 (UTC) Scope: Former Theatre of Trier, completely destroyed on December 23, 1944.  Support. Valuable image. Useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 18:21, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2021-12-05 18:25 (UTC) Scope: Sylhús (Hindeloopen) Tower on the Sylhús.  Best in Scope Good and useful image -- Spurzem (talk) 18:32, 5 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2021-12-05 21:13 (UTC) Scope: Treron calvus sharpei (African green pigeon)  Comment It is very difficult to know which are the subspecies in this category, you have to open the images one by one, it takes a long time. Prior work on the classification would have been desirable to isolate the images of the subspecies. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)  I withdraw my nomination True. And I did find a better one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2021-12-05 21:25 (UTC) Scope: Ceuthmochares aereus flavirostris (Blue malkoha)  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2021-12-05 21:26 (UTC) Scope: Cinnyris cupreus cupreus (Copper sunbird) female  Support Useful and used. --GRDN711 (talk) 05:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: August Geyler (talk) on 2021-12-06 01:08 (UTC) Scope: Cemetery chapel at Ostfriedhof (Leipzig) Used in: de:Ostfriedhof (Leipzig)  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:29, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-06 05:34 (UTC) Scope: Front of the tower of the Grote of Andreaskerk in Hattem.  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-06 06:16 (UTC) Scope: La lecture au jardin du Luxembourg - Charles Maurin (Reading in the Luxembourg Gardens) Musée Toulouse-Lautrec  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-06 06:17 (UTC) Scope: Albi Cathédrale Sainte-Cécile - retable (polyptyque) de la vie du Christ (Altarpiece (polyptych) of the life of Christ)  Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 08:09, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.	Review Page (edit) Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2021-12-06 06:20 (UTC) Scope: La gardienne d'Oie (The Goose Keeper) by Henri Rachou  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:48, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2021-12-06 07:02 (UTC) Scope: War memorial on the Noorderbolwerk (Dokkum). Detail. Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2021-12-06 08:07 (UTC) Scope: Bufonaria cavitensis, shell Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2021-12-06 10:38 (UTC) Scope: Erythrocercus mccallii nigeriae (Chestnut-capped flycatcher) Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2021-12-06 10:52 (UTC) Scope: Cyanomitra verticalis (Green-headed sunbird) female Open for review.
Review it! (edit) Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2021-12-06 10:55 (UTC) Scope: Cinnyris johannae (Johanna's sunbird) female Open for review.	Review it! (edit) Nominated by: August Geyler (talk) on 2021-12-06 12:48 (UTC) Scope: Scaffolding in Leipzig Used in: Wikidata Object 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.