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

candidate list

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

62,783 closed valued image candidates
Closed as		Nominations
Promoted	56,610 (90.2%)
Undecided	3,554 (5.7%)
Declined	2,619 (4.2%)

New valued image nominations

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Diamondarmorstev (talk) on 2026-03-17 00:27 (UTC)
Scope: Pulaski County Courthouse (Virginia)
Comment Perspective correction needed --Llez (talk) 05:58, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-17 13:37 (UTC)
Scope: Southern Adriatic Ports Authority (Bari), Northwest View
Reason: Headquarters of the Southern Adriatic Ports Authority, a quite relevant administrative body responsible for multiple ports in southeast Italy. -- Aciarium (talk)
Support Useful.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:38, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Oppose We don't need two scopes which are very similar. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:51, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Oppose One day, maybe we should have a discussion about what is a "scope", I agree with Charlesjsharp --Jebulon (talk) 20:48, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-18 06:21 (UTC)
Scope: The Minotaur on the 'Giants' Landing Strip'
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-18 07:55 (UTC)
Scope: Servizio di polizia scientifica vehicles, Fiat Fullback
Reason: Only one in scope. The polizia scientifica is the Italian scientific/forensic police service and the only department to currently use box-bodied pickup trucks. -- Aciarium (talk)
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] scope should specify vehicle. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:56, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Charlesjsharp: Thank you, I have changed the scope accordingly. --Aciarium (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-03-18 08:17 (UTC)
Scope: Esnes castle , exterior seen from the northwest
Reason: The building is listed as a historic monument in France. -- JackyM59 (talk)
Support Useful and used. --Petro Stelte (talk) 10:05, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Petro Stelte (talk) on 2026-03-18 14:00 (UTC)
Scope: Village of Palaikastro, Lasithi, Crete, Greece - view from the east.
Reason: This is the only picture in the category that shows the village from this direction. All other pictures show the village from the opposite direction, towards the sea and my picture shows the entire village, not just a small part of it.. -- Petro Stelte (talk)
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-03-18 19:56 (UTC)
Scope: Cambrai Shrub House, exterior seen from the west – Nord - France
Reason: The building is listed as a historic monument in France. -- JackyM59 (talk)
Support Best in scope, useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:17, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-18 21:54 (UTC)
Scope: St. Nicholas Church (Dolno Divjaci), exterior view from south-east
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century church. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:38, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-18 22:04 (UTC)
Scope: St. Nicholas Church (Krivogaštani), exterior view from south-west
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century church, which is the seat of the First Krivogaštani Parish. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-18 22:09 (UTC)
Scope: Dragoevo, aerial view from south-west
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this village. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:12, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-03-19 05:36 (UTC)
Scope: Tetrarca tetragona (Four-sided Ark), left valve
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:11, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-19 06:08 (UTC)
Scope: *Taíno artefacts - Hybrid figurine - Taíno Culture - Haïti - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 11:59, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Question bearing in mind your comments on bird scopes, should this not be side view? I think it's fine as it is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Comment That's a good point, but here it's a flat stone, this is the only engraved side: it's a small pendant.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:49, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-19 06:10 (UTC)
Scope: Galeria Valeria Eutropia wife of Emperor Maximian - front view - Musée Saint-Raymond Toulouse
scope needs improvement. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:47, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Question But bearing in mind your comments on bird scopes, should this not be front view? I think it's fine as it is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Comment That's true because for this piece we have eight photographs in the category in all positions. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:55, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Paramanu Sarkar (talk) on 2026-03-19 08:08 (UTC)
Scope: Francolinus pondicerianus (Grey Francolin)
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:59, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-03-19 11:01 (UTC)
Scope: Meretrix lusoria (Asian Hard Clam), right valve
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:00, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-19 14:07 (UTC)
Scope: Agentur für Bevölkerungsschutz, Southeast View
Reason: The Agentur für Bevölkerungsschutz is the central agency for civil protection in South Tyrol and responsible for the coordination of civil-protection measures affecting a local population of more than half a million people. -- Aciarium (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-19 14:33 (UTC)
Scope: Waltherplatz (Bozen-Bolzano), Aerial View
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:00, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-19 14:43 (UTC)
Scope: Dom Maria Himmelfahrt (Bolzano) - Bells, Tower Bell
Reason: One of five tower bells of the church Maria Himmelfahrt in Bozen-Bolzano, a cultural heritage monument. -- Aciarium (talk)
image is too dark Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:01, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Charlesjsharp: Thank you for the feedback, I will re-edit the raw file soon. I am positive that this issue is mitigable. --Aciarium (talk) 11:20, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Charlesjsharp: Done --Aciarium (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-19 14:45 (UTC)
Scope: Dom Maria Himmelfahrt (Bolzano) - Bells, Carillon
Reason: The carillon of the church Maria Himmelfahrt in Bozen-Bolzano, a cultural heritage monument. -- Aciarium (talk)
Support Useful and used. This is the only picture of the carillon. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:22, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-19 15:03 (UTC)
Scope: Aussichtsturm Kohlern
Reason: This observation tower was one of the landmarks of the Kohlern mountain near Bozen-Bolzano. -- Aciarium (talk)
. Support A veeery little bit better than the other candidate in the category.--Jebulon (talk) 21:33, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:07 (UTC)
Scope: Alcippe morrisonia (Morrison's fulvetta)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:07 (UTC)
Scope: Urocissa caerulea (Taiwan blue magpie)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:09, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:05 (UTC)
Scope: Treron sieboldii sieboldii (White-bellied green pigeon)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:19, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: A.BourgeoisP (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:19 (UTC)
Scope: Headframes of Arthur de Buyer Coal Mine in Magny-Danigon
Reason: It is clearly one of the finest postcards of the "puits Arthur-de-Buyer" (the deepest coal mine in France between 1900 and 1910). The two metal headframes are at the center of the image, along with the chimney, a testament to steam engine technology. The print quality of the postcard is extremely fine! Bricks, bolts, and blades of grass can be seen very clearly! -- A.BourgeoisP (talk)
Please base your scope on a Commons category (e.g., Arthur de Buyer Coal Mine, Magny-Danigon or similar. I don't know if there exists one yet; if it doesn't, please create one.). Otherwise it is difficult to check if the image you nominated actually is best in scope. --Aciarium (talk) 11:29, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done I apologize for these mistakes. Better now ? A.BourgeoisP (talk) 12:25, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] @A.BourgeoisP: Still not ideal, sorry. A scope should consist of one concise category, not multiple ones. Furthermore, this category should be the most specific one to the nominated image. In this case, a suitable scope for your nomination could be Chevalement du puits Arthur de Buyer, Northeast View (or from whatever direction the camera was pointed to the structure; I didn't check whether it really is northeast). In this category, your nomination actually is the best one to illustrate the Chevalement. --Aciarium (talk) 15:00, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done --A.BourgeoisP (talk) 22:05, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Are there any headframes of the Arthur de Buyer Coal Mine that aren't in Magny-Danigon? --Aciarium (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] No, I'm mentioning the municipality for informational purposes. A.BourgeoisP (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Then I think a specification of the municipality in the scope is superfluous. --Aciarium (talk) 07:19, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: A.BourgeoisP (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:12 (UTC)
Scope: Bucket chain excavator in Old gravel pit in Champagney, Haute-Saône
Reason: It is clearly the best photograph of the “Titan” excavator at the Champagney gravel pit. This angle provides the best view of the technical installation and is the only one taken from the opposite bank of the body of water. The other views are taken from the same side as the machine, and the extraction section is much less visible, including the bucket chain and the water pump cabin floating on the left. More generally, it is also a very fine illustration of an early twentieth-century bucket-chain excavator, with an interesting point of view and a lively scene! -- A.BourgeoisP (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: A.BourgeoisP (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:31 (UTC)
Scope: Peugeot 308 (2013)
Reason: A high-quality photograph & highly representative of this car (front 3/4 view), used across multiple Wikimedia Commons pages and in several language versions of Wikipedia, including as a main illustration (infobox), and even on Wikidata! -- A.BourgeoisP (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: A.BourgeoisP (talk) on 2026-03-19 20:31 (UTC)
Scope: Peugeot 308 III, front view
Reason: A high-quality photograph & highly representative of this car (front 3/4 view), used across multiple Wikimedia Commons pages and in several language versions of Wikipedia, including as a main illustration (infobox), and even on Wikidata! -- A.BourgeoisP (talk)
Comment Please include the appropriate category on Wikimedia Commons in the scope and precisify that it's a front view as there are other good picture from different perspectives (e.g. this one). --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done Please excuse me! I haven't posted an image here for 13 years... I'm trying to get used to how the procedure works. Is it better now? A.BourgeoisP (talk) 12:23, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Yes, better. I’ve just added that’s a front view. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 02:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-03-20 06:06 (UTC)
Scope: Vexillum rubrocostatum, shell
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:53, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-20 06:26 (UTC)
Scope: *Diquis art - Man's Head - Chiriqui Culture Costa Rica - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Reason: Support Best in scope, useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:34, 20 March 2026 (UTC) -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-20 06:30 (UTC)
Scope: Anatolian mother goddess - Musée Saint-Raymond in Toulouse
Reason: Support Best in scope, useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:33, 20 March 2026 (UTC) -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk)[reply]
Musée Saint-Raymond of where ? --Jebulon (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done In Toulouse, of course . --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-20 08:29 (UTC)
Scope: St. Michael the Archangel Church (Sredno Egri), exterior view from south-east
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century church, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope and used. The only overall view -- JackyM59 (talk) 09:09, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-20 08:30 (UTC)
Scope: Poeševo, aerial view from east
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-20 08:32 (UTC)
Scope: Ostrec, aerial view from south-east
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-20 08:49 (UTC)
Scope: Streptopelia orientalis orii (Rufous turtle dove)
Comment Attention, there's a problem with the scope... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:44, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:43, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:18, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Question But it doesn't say side view. I think it's fine as it is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-03-20 09:05 (UTC)
Scope: Cambrai belfry view from Mail Saint-Martin, Northwest - Nord - France
Reason: The building is listed as a historic monument in France. -- JackyM59 (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:46, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Petro Stelte (talk) on 2026-03-21 05:22 (UTC)
Scope: Iris unguicularis subsp. cretensis - habitus
Reason: I think this picture best illustrates this plant in its entirety and how it grows in its natural environment. -- Petro Stelte (talk)
Comment In botany it would be more correct to say: Iris-unguicularis-ssp.-cretensis - habitus.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:50, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done I changed it. Thanks. --Petro Stelte (talk) 06:55, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:19, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-21 06:34 (UTC)
Scope: The quasi colossal head of Maximian (Herculius) - Musée Saint-Raymond Toulouse
Support Useful and used --Petro Stelte (talk) 07:07, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] I have changed almost colossal to quasi colossal and Hercules to Herculius. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:28, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-21 06:35 (UTC)
Scope: Fraxinus excelsior (flowers) - Immature male inflorescences
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:58, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-03-21 07:58 (UTC)
Scope: Rooms of the former Anchin College in Douai, exterior seen from the west – Nord - France
Reason: The building is listed as a historic monument in France. -- JackyM59 (talk)
Support Best in scope, useful and used. Comment Thank you for the nomination, but there is no signature. -- JackyM59 (talk) 07:53, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: ROCKY (talk) on 2026-03-21 09:15 (UTC)
Scope: Close-up photographs of Kalijira rice
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: ROCKY (talk) on 2026-03-21 09:33 (UTC)
Scope: Close-up photographs of Kataribhog rice
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-21 09:56 (UTC)
Scope: Anas crecca crecca (Eurasian teal) male
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:20, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-21 10:51 (UTC)
Scope: Pernis Ptilorhynchus orientalis (Crested honey-buzzard) in flight
Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 22:28, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-21 11:07 (UTC)
Scope: Lophospiza trivirgata formosae (Crested goshawk) in flight
Support The only one in scope, useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:43, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-21 23:07 (UTC)
Scope: Gratče Waterfall
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this waterfall. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope and used. -- JackyM59 (talk) 07:21, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-21 23:10 (UTC)
Scope: Gratče Lake, view from south
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this lake. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Comment A single view cannot represent a lake. The direction of the shot must also be indicated in the scope: North, South, Northeast, etc.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:12, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done I’ve added the direction of the view in the scope. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:55, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] * Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:18, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-21 23:11 (UTC)
Scope: Gratče Lake, dam
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this dam. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:01, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-03-22 05:42 (UTC)
Scope: Gastrana matadoa, left valve
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:56, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2026-03-22 05:53 (UTC)
Scope: Dried flower petal of a Hydrangea paniculata
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:07, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-22 06:45 (UTC)
Scope: Nezara viridula mating - left individu with Eggs of Trichopoda pictipennis
Reason: Left individu with Eggs of Trichopoda pictipennis -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk)
Best in Scope and used. Impressive photo -- JackyM59 (talk) 07:28, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-03-22 07:04 (UTC)
Scope: Venus, inv.Ra 52, front view - Musée Saint-Raymond in Toulouse
Useful and used.--ROCKY (talk) 11:27, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-03-22 07:49 (UTC)
Scope: Vaucelles Abbey - Monks' wing and abbot's palace wing, exterior seen from the southwest – Nord - France
Reason: The building is listed as a historic monument in France. This is the view showing the ends of the two buildings. -- JackyM59 (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:20, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Alexander-93 (talk) on 2026-03-22 10:37 (UTC)
Scope: Ford E-Transit Custom (2023) MS-RT - right rear view
Used in: de:Ford Transit Custom
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-22 15:47 (UTC)
Scope: Psilopogon nuchalis (Taiwan barbet) ventral
Comment It would be useful to add, ventral view...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:24, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] If you say so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 22:31, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-22 15:49 (UTC)
Scope: Pomatorhinus musicus (Taiwan scimitar-babbler) side view
Comment "side view" would be useful for the scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:31, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] If you say so, but no idea why you suggest this, changing a convention that has been used for the last X,000 bird VIs, including several current VIs. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-22 15:51 (UTC)
Scope: Cyanoderma ruficeps praecognitum (Rufous-capped babbler) side view
Support "side view" would be useful for the scope--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:34, 22 March 2026 (UTC) If you say so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Jebulon (talk) on 2026-03-22 16:06 (UTC)
Scope: the ferry-boat Achilleas (ship, 1987) (IMO 8711033), lateral view
Reason: Geocoded. Best in scope IMO. The lateral view provides a good idea of the full legth of this boat -- Jebulon (talk)
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:36, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-22 16:05 (UTC)
Scope: PMV Survivor II, front left
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:04, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-22 16:07 (UTC)
Scope: PMV Survivor II, left side
There ia an informal agreement that we have two scopes front left/right and rear left/right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:03, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Charlesjsharp: Sorry, I wasn't aware! That makes sense, thanks for notifying me about this. --Aciarium (talk) 15:59, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-03-22 16:07 (UTC)
Scope: PMV Survivor II, rear left
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:03, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-22 19:13 (UTC)
Scope: St. Demetrius Church (Bučin), exterior view from south-west
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this church, which was initially built in the 16th century and later underwent reconstruction. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Useful and used.--ROCKY (talk) 02:00, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-22 20:21 (UTC)
Scope: St. Athanasius Church (Čajle), exterior view from south-west
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century church. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:50, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-22 20:19 (UTC)
Scope: Nativity of the Theotokos Church (Novaci), interior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture from the interior of this monastery church. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope . The only photo that provides a comprehensive view of this richly decorated interior. -- JackyM59 (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-03-23 05:48 (UTC)
Scope: Vexillum funereum (Funereal Mitre), shell
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:43, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2026-03-23 06:41 (UTC)
Scope: *Flowers of Crataegus monogyna* (flowers) Whitethorn**
Support Useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:45, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-23 09:30 (UTC)
Scope: Oriolus traillii ardens (Maroon oriole) male
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-23 09:31 (UTC)
Scope: Pericrocotus solaris griseogularis (Grey-chinned minivet) male
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-03-23 15:01 (UTC)
Scope: Pycnonotus sinensis formosae (Light-vented bulbul)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-03-23 15:53 (UTC)
Scope: The Little Gleaner, by Hugo Salmson – Nantes Museum of Fine Arts - France
Reason: The only photograph of this work in the Nantes Museum that is not exactly the same as the version in the Stockholm Museum -- JackyM59 (talk)
Support The only one in scope, useful and used. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-23 22:34 (UTC)
Scope: St. Elijah Church (Plaḱe), exterior view from south-west
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century church. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-23 22:36 (UTC)
Scope: St. Naum of Ohrid Church (Livoišta), exterior view from south-west
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this church, which is famous for its open narthex on the west side. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-03-23 22:38 (UTC)
Scope: Gorni Podlog, aerial view from south-west
Open for review.

I have added the following to the VI Nomination ProcedureːPlease ensure you have the FastCCI gadget enabled. You should use this to identify existing VIs with similar scopes. Note that if an image shows up as FP or QI it may also be a Valued Image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:10, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Closed valued image candidates

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.