Commons:Valued image candidates

Shortcut: COM:VIC

Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations 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.

Skip to current candidates 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.

Please 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.

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 typeYou getWhen
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ 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. -- ~~~~ 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
63,850 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
 57,576 (90.2%) 
Undecided
  
 3,636 (5.7%) 
Declined
  
 2,638 (4.1%) 


New valued image nominations


   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2026-08-10 04:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Sculpture wall detail by Louis le Roy and others, circa 1970, at Ecokathedraal, Mildam, Netherlands.
  •  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:02, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Scope is vague and too wide. Suggest something like "Sculpture wall detail by Louis le Roy, circa 1970, at Ecokathedraal, Mildam, Netherlands". --GRDN711 (talk) 06:01, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done, Scope adjusted. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:00, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
  • : Comment Scope is defintiely better but could be more concise. Many major artists had others in their studio who worked on their paintings or art work.The name most often associated with the Ecokathedraal is the artist and creater, Louis le Roy (1924-2012). He didn't do all the Ecokathedraal sculptures by himsellf but was certainly an inspirational and driving force. Even today, others maintain and expand the Ecokathedraal. Given that, perhaps a better and more concise scope might be "Sculpture wall detail by Louis le Roy and others, circa 1970, at Ecokathedraal, Mildam, Netherlands". Your thoughts? --GRDN711 (talk) 21:02, 12 August 2026 (UTC)
  •  Support Strike my previous oppose and now support. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:15, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-11 15:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Dante Alighieri by Vincenzo Vela - Palazzo Zuckerman Padova

 Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:20, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-10 16:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Peronio Column - 'Piazza della Frutta' in Padua

 Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:24, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-08-10 19:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Tomb (recumbent effigy) of Saint Omer in the Cathedral of Saint-Omer - France
Reason:
Classified as a historical monument -- JackyM59 (talk)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2026-08-10 21:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Maison, 34 rue Blanqui (Tours)
  •  Best in Scope and used -- JackyM59 (talk) 06:04, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-11 05:05 (UTC)
Scope:
Isodontia mexicana - male
  •  Best in Scope and used -- JackyM59 (talk) 06:55, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-11 05:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Landscape with three figures under a large tree - Museo d'Arte – Palazzo Zuckermann Padova

 Support Useful and used (But please change the scope to "Landscape with three figures", for only two of the three figures are under the tree) --Llez (talk) 05:45, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2026-08-11 05:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Lottia orbignyi, shell
  •  Best in Scope ans used -- JackyM59 (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2026-08-12 05:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Laciniaria plicata, dwarf form, shell
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-08-12 07:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Church of Saint-Germain-sur-Ay - France, exterior from the south
Reason:
Classified as a historical monument -- JackyM59 (talk)

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:23, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-12 07:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Fleur dans un vase en cuivre (Flower in a copper vase) by Albert Dubois-Pillet
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-12 07:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Russian machine gun Maxim PM M1910 (7.62×54mmR) on a wheeled mount (World war I) - Museo storico navale (Venice)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2026-08-13 05:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Mytilaster minimus, right valve
  •  Best in Scope and used -- JackyM59 (talk) 05:55, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-13 09:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Porto di Ancona Luigi Vanvitelli - Museo storico navale (Venice)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-13 09:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Madonna con bambino e angeli Cerchia di Bartolomeo Bellano
  •  Best in Scope and used -- JackyM59 (talk) 17:05, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2026-08-14 04:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Inflorescence of a Rosa canina (wild rose)
  •  Best in Scope and used -- JackyM59 (talk) 07:30, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2026-08-14 05:27 (UTC)
Scope:
Monodonta perplexa, shell
  •  Best in Scope and used -- JackyM59 (talk) 07:31, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-14 07:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Bust of Giorgio Perlasca - Padova

 Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:21, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-08-14 07:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Balcony of a Venetian galley bearing the Grimani family coat of arms

 Comment The linked CAT is too broad. It needs to be specific to the ship or part of the ship. --Tagooty (talk) 08:24, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  •  Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Tagooty (talk) on 2026-08-14 08:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Gate Building, Government Botanical Garden, Ooty - southwest facade
Used in:
en:Government Botanical Garden • wikidata:Q140952190
Reason:
A historical building built in 1859 -- Tagooty (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Iñaki LL (talk) on 2026-07-25 00:02 UTC
Scope:
Grande halle de La Villette - Illuminated
Reason:
Clean image of the Grande halle de La Villette's façade, illuminated, inexistent so far -- Iñaki LL (talk)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (UTC)



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)



Closed valued image candidates


Pending Most valued review candidates

Scope

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
AntanO on 2015-04-14 16:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Cisticola juncidis (Zitting Cisticola)

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Paramanu Sarkar (talk) on 2026-08-04 05:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Cisticola juncidis (Zitting Cisticola)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 03:19, 13 August 2026 (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

   
Category:Valued image candidates#Valued%20image%20candidates Category:Valued images#Valued%20image%20candidates
Category:Valued image candidates Category:Valued images