This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.
Featured pictures are images that addsignificantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured onWikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to thefeatured picture criteria.
Promoting an image
If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.
For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and theconsensus is in its favor, it can be added to theWikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions ofsockpuppets.
All users may comment. However, only those who have been registered on the English Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.
Thearchive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.
If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it atCommons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all otherWikimedia projects as well.
Delisting an image
Afeatured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.
Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.
For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and theconsensus is in its favor, it will be delisted fromWikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there iscurrently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except for one point:If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, itmust be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.
Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.
Note thatdelisting an image does not meandeleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).
Evaluate the merit of a nomination against thefeatured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.
Step 2: Create a subpage
For Nominations
To create a subpage ofWikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g.,Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.
For Delists
To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.
For Delist and replace
To create a subpage for your delist and replace, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.
WriteSupport, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
WriteOppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture.All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
You canweak support orweak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
To change your opinion, strike it out (with<s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, writeSpeedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed atfull size (high-resolution) in animage editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed atthumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.
How to comment for Delist Images
WriteKeep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
WriteDelist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
WriteDelist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
You canweak keep,weak delist orweak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
To change your opinion, strike it out (with<s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
You may find theglossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using{{FPCgloss}}.
Editing candidates
If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but donot overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.
Is my monitor adjusted correctly?
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display isproperly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may bevery difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background. Note that the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
Original – Buddy Holly in a publicity picture for Brunswick Records, around 1957
Reason
No artifacts as far as I can tell, very high resolution, good quality, just generally seems to capture the vibe ofBuddy Holly very well. It truly brings him to life on his page. Falls under public domain, obviously adds value to his article, verifiable perBrittanica. I improved the description. No inappropriate manipulation.
Support — The focal plane is about an inch and a half too far forward, so that his nose is perfectly in focus while is face is a touch soft, but all the other technical qualities are good and I love the style.Moonreach (talk)14:40, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the revision history, it appears @GDuwen provided the original scan of the front of the photo and provided the source link. Later @К.Лаврентьев uploaded a HQ scan of the same photo but didn't provide the source. The current version of this file is an edit of that upload by @Hohum. ―Howard •🌽3318:13, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Out of curiosity, why does it need to have a live link? The full version of the photo identifies it as being of Buddy Holly, and taken by Brunswick Records, and Britannica uses it which I would say satisfies the verifiability requirement.𝓕𝓵𝓸𝓫𝓵𝓲𝓷 (Talk to me! ·My contribs)19:11, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral —@Howardcorn33: Thanks for the ping. Indeed I uploaded the original damaged publicity picture with the writing on the bottom to show that it fulfilled the description for works "in the public domain in the United States because it was published in the United States between 1931 and 1977, inclusive, without a copyright notice". Then someone replaced it with a file of a higher resolution. I'm now trying to locate some archival version of the website that the uploader used so that we at least get to replace that dead link. I'll do some search for its use in press articles in the 1950s since these portraits usually pop up right away.--GDuwenHoller!20:17, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Looking through TinEye, I found that Lavrentiev's upload exactly matchesthis version of the file by Hulton Archive via Getty Images (also published onthis BuzzFeed article where I got the credit and file from). The image is provided for licensinghere at the Getty Images website, and the resolution data there exactly matches the upload by Lavrentiev. Therefore I will add the Getty link to the file description. ―Howard •🌽3320:41, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Good job. I expanded the permission field including examples of the use of the picture in the press (besides of the generic explanation as to why that type of works are usually PD). That should suffice.--GDuwenHoller!22:05, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's a very faint watermark so it didn't catch my eye until you mentioned it now. No clue who "Klegman" (I also read "Klugman") is. The usual sources don't provide any information on this name regarding a photographer. ―Howard •🌽3305:13, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks muchly. It turns out there were only a few bad things - two large scratches and a large hair on his collar, so restoration wasn't too bad. Uploaded and offered here as an ALT. — Chris Woodrich (talk)01:01, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: as it is, the licensing info is incomplete. Are we supposed to be going off of PD-Italy plus PD-1996; or, if the photo was published in the US within 30 days of its publication in Italy, PD-US-not renewed? ―Howard •🌽3317:59, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — I'm borderline on this. The composition is solid but the detail at full magnification shows JPEG artifacts. The full-size image is under a megabyte. Thesource image it's cropped from is also small in terms of storage size.Moonreach (talk)16:11, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — These are unquestionably potato chips, but they're oddly noisy up close considering how well lit the picture is. I also wonder if this image alone would provide full context to the hypothetical viewer who had never seen them before; there's no packaging or scale indicator.Moonreach (talk)16:05, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Original – Winston Churchill takes aim with aSten gun during a visit to the Royal Artillery experimental station at Shoeburyness in Essex, 13 June 1941
It's the official portrait, though. It was presented to the world this way by the White House. I would imagine every single official portrait of anyone famous is likely to have some before-the-upload editing; do Wikipedia or Wikimedia have a stance on that?Moonreach (talk)20:55, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is no requirement that the official portrait be used to illustrate a political biography. It's moreso tradition and on-wiki precedent. Even so, we also have precedent against using the official portrait as inKim Jong Il if it is edited to an unrealistic degree and the criteria 8 ofWP:FP? specifically rules out "Any manipulation which causes the main subject to be misrepresented". ―Howard •🌽3308:36, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Original – TheHassan Tower, the minaret of an incomplete mosque in Rabat, Morocco, commissioned by Abu Yusuf Yaqub al-Mansur near the end of the 12th century.
Original – From the file page: "Carp Banners in Kyoto (formerly known as:Boys' Festival from the Bluff, Yokohama [sic]), oil on canvas, 1888, by Louis-Jules Dumoulin (French painter, 1860-1924)."
Reason
Saw this in yesterday's featured article (Adolfo Farsari) and was quite struck by it. The painting's physical dimensions are quite small, so I think this resolution does it proper justice. It's a minor element on Farsari's wiki page but a major one on that of the artist who painted it,Louis-Jules Dumoulin, so I've favored that as the place of maximum EV.
Oppose - Useful, but soft and rather low resolution. This is a product of its time, but the falls haven't disappeared so a new image can be created. — Chris Woodrich (talk)13:11, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.
Place the following text at the bottom of theWP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing{{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
When promoted, perform the following:
Place the following text at the bottom of theWP:FPC/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description atArticle, byCreator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description atArticle, byCreator (edited byEditor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, byCreator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
Add the image to the appropriate section ofWikipedia:Featured pictures -newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using{{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., thepage_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing{{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator'stalk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place{{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator'stalk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
Move the nomination entry to thetop of the"Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to thetop of the section.
Add the nomination entry to thebottom of theFebruary archive. This is done by simply adding the line{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to thebottom of the archive.
If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:
Place the following text at the bottom of theWP:FPC/delist/subpage:
{{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
Replace the{{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with{{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag{{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., theimage_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version.Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page ofWikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section ofWikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
Move the nomination entry to thetop of the"Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to thetop of the section.
Add the nomination entry to thebottom of thearchived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to thebottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please donot add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so atWikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.
Comment – I have two concerns. The first is the odd mix of licenses. I think this should be listed as unencumbered public domain, as it is a photograph of a 2D work in the public domain. The second is that there seems to be strong directional light in the photo; the painting is brighter at the top than it is at the bottom. I looked at other versions online, but none of them are particularly good copies, so it's ambiguous.Moonreach (talk)20:43, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I personally think the license makes sense. In countries with asweat of the brow doctrine, that component of the license makes it 100% clear that the image is free to use. Although the Wikimedia Foundation's position is that reproductions of 2D works creates no new copyright (hence{{PD-ART}}), that position has not historically been global. (There are people who go around and remove these double liceneses, which I find frustrating). — Chris Woodrich (talk)20:51, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My account is 21 years old, and only today I learned that PD-Art supports custom licenses for photography. Good to know - will keep that in mind if I get a chance to do some more photographing of paintings. — Chris Woodrich (talk)14:49, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on15 Feb 2026 at14:40:32 (UTC)
Delist: Current featured videoReplacement: Higher resolution version currently used in article
Reason
The current FP was removed from the article and replaced withFile:Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari.webm. As we cannot keep featured status on an unused image, suggest replacement
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on15 Feb 2026 at02:38:38 (UTC)
Original – NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft, secured to the mobile launcher at Launch Pad 39B at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida
Comment The EV is strong here now, but this feels premature given that this space mission is scheduled to launch in a month or so, and photos relating to its launch, trip around the moon and the return will have much stronger EV.Nick-D (talk)10:20, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I could go either way on this. It's a well-composed photograph, even though it doesn't really distinguish itself from the many other launchpad photos Wikipedia has from NASA, and even though I don't like that one bank of lights that's half cut off at the lower right. It's grainy, not to the point I'd say is a deal-breaker but which doesn't count in its favor, either. I do think it has good EV, but combined with my other misgivings I'm inclined to agree with Nick-D above that we'd be better off waiting for actual mission photos.Moonreach (talk)18:53, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support with a caveat: Remarque only died in 1970, so this is not PD in Germany. Given that this is based on a German novel, we should note that on the Commons page. — Chris Woodrich (talk)14:45, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose – FP criteria 7, as the source information for this video file is unclear. More information is required than simply "All Quiet on the Western Front" in the source description. ―Howard •🌽3315:41, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not well framed and an awkward photo of Mandela. As Mandela had met with de Klerk and the leadership of the National Party on many occasions before this (he started meeting with de Klerk's predecessor while he was in jail, for instance), I don't see why it's particularly historically important. Photos of their key meetings, important events they attended jointly in South Africa and receiving the Nobel Peace Prize together would have vastly higher EV.Nick-D (talk)10:24, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Are these free? Pictures from the 1990s aren't usually free, so it is unlikely that we have them. That makes all the difference.Yann (talk)21:43, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There don't seem to be any on Commons, but I'd politely disagree that that's relevant here. If you read accounts of this era in South Africa, Mandela and de Klerk met regularly and were at the same events regularly (both as political opponents as well as allies in the broader project of steering South Africa through a transition to democracy), so the noteworthiness of the event seems significant when considering the EV of a not-great photo. The article on de Klerk doesn't mention this WEF meeting and that on Mandela mentions it only briefly in a different context, so it doesn't appear to have particular significance. It is certainly a useful image, but depicts what was by that stage a fairly routine type of engagement between the two men.Nick-D (talk)09:03, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
High quality image of a major part of the culture of Windsor, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan. The Ford Fireworks have, under various names, been a major draw to the region since 1959. This image shows not only the fireworks but also a major Detroit landmark, theRenaissance Center, giving a sense of scale as well as a definite geolocation.
Support delist, suggests replacement for another file The currently used lead image looks slightly too blue and far too remastered (I also want to add that the currently used file is not cropped properly).I believe that the scan I have suggested below it looks slightly better. That being said, I believe that ‘George Washington by Gilbert Stuart, 1803.jpg’ should be used as the lead image instead.GuyMan529 (talk)22:28, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - What is the source for the proposed ALT? Completely different colours, different resolution... hard to verify its accuracy without a valid source. — Chris Woodrich (talk)13:14, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Actually you're right. I didn't look too hard into it but this is not the same image provided at the source.
The second replacement is not a high-resolution scan, and I do not have a record of where the replacement (1) image was sourced from, due to the reason that I had purchased a new laptop as my old one (which had the source of the image noted down) was destroyed beyond repair.Auspiciouswastaken (talk)11:21, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@GuyMan529 I noticed that the images were updated on every single page before a clear consensus was reached and prior to the close of the voting period. Could you clarify the basis for implementing the change at this stage? As I understand it, changes following a nomination or vote should generally wait until discussion concludes and consensus is established. If I am mistaken about the procedure, please let me know, and I will be replacing the image with the previously used lead image 'til consensus is reached.Auspiciouswastaken (talk)11:24, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Auspiciouswastaken Oh yes. I believe I made those edits because the 1st replacement image had no consensus to begin with (I posted those edits during midnight, so I don’t exactly know why, so I apologise.) But that being said, until consensus has been reached, I believe we should keep the original image (Gilbert Stuart Williamstown Portrait of George Washington.jpg) as the lead image for the George Washington article.GuyMan529 (talk)11:41, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I don't remember the specific website where I found the HQ scans. It's been a while, and I lost a record of the source, by the way the HQ Scan for the alternative replacement is my original replacement but uncompressed.Auspiciouswastaken (talk)13:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. The exact source for this exact image is still not provided.And even if we want to replace it (unlikely due to false referencing), I find that the one that I have suggested looks more ideal because, again, the ones you have suggested look too blue and look too remastered, still better than the 1st replacement suggestion.GuyMan529 (talk)13:58, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
%2c_Anilao%2c_Filipinas%2c_2023-08-23%2c_DD_186.jpg)
.jpg)
_L%2527%25C3%25A9t%25C3%25A9_ou_Adam_et_Eve_-_Suzanne_Valadon_-_Mus%25C3%25A9e_national_d%2527Art_moderne_Paris.jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_The_Girl_With_The_Pearl_Earring_(1665).jpg){kind=link}
