Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia de San Agustín, París, Francia, 2022-10-31, DD 93-95 HDR.jpg
Appearance
Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2026 at 17:44:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Paris
Info Church of Saint Augustin, Paris, France. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
Support Excellent play with the unavoidable distorsion. Very good, and I know the place ! --Jebulon (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose composition is not ideal for FP distracting foreground elements, awkward chandelier crop, and very strong wide-angle distortion reduce the overall visual balance. Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 21:47, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose Per Olfa Yakoubi --Tagooty (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Support very good wide angle view in high quality.--Ermell (talk) 06:28, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Support crop chairs in bottom, to start bellow first step, so chairs wont disturb and view is more clear. --Mile (talk) 07:19, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Support IMO opposing this for the perspective distortion is somewhat close-minded, sorry to say. Not every picture needs to be perspective-corrected to death. This picture instead chooses to highlight the perspective distortion as a feature to illustrate the imposing scale of the building, which is an entirely valid approach. Cmao20 (talk) 12:23, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for your assessment, Cmao20, but I think the motivation for the vote is not based on the picture itselft. I just realised that when I went through all current FP candidates yesterday morning I opposed the 2 noms of Olfa Yakoubi because none of them convinced me in terms of level of detail. The first edit he/she did afterwards was coming here to oppose this candidate (and second oppose in his FP record, what are the odds?). Definitely unfair but nothing unusual. Poco a poco (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- Se que no podemos prevenir esto, pero al menos conmigo, votame todo lo negativo que puedas, nunca hare eso. Aunque a veces pudiera estar equivocado intento ser lo mas objetivo posible Wilfredor (talk) 14:56, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- I’m really disappointed and honestly hurt by your comment, Diego. Reading that my vote could be interpreted as revenge or retaliation was painful for me, because that is not how I participate in FP discussions at all.
- I can’t imagine that you would think my oppose is related to the fact that you opposed some pictures I nominated — especially since this not even mine photo. I always try to give my opinion based on the image itself and according to my understanding of FP criteria, even when my opinion may differ from others.
- I still don’t like the composition of this photo. In my opinion, the framing is not ideal, the foreground elements are distracting, and the brightness and distortion affect the overall visual balance. That is why I opposed it, and I still stand by my opinion sincerely and in good faith.
- What hurt me the most is the implication that my opinion was dishonest or motivated by personal feelings. I respect your work and your contributions a lot. In fact, I have supported some of your photos before, and there are also photos of yours that I personally don’t like but chose not to oppose because I respect different artistic views and standards.
- By the way, we already met before — I don’t know if you remember — and I genuinely appreciate your photography overall. That is also why this statement was painful for me to read. Even when we disagree on a nomination, I believe we should assume good faith and respect each other’s opinions.
- And honestly, after reading your comment, I no longer feel comfortable voting on your photos in the future if my opinions are going to be interpreted this way instead of being seen as sincere photographic criticism.
- For this specific picture, I simply do not think it reaches FP level, and my vote was made honestly, sincerely, and without any personal intention. Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- I think that what Diego commented is not what he meant, remember that his level of English is not very good and he could use very direct or incorrect words, there is also the cultural difference. Wilfredor (talk) 19:38, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- Please Wilfredor, don't talk for me about what I meant or not. I don't think either, that you are the most appropiate person to judge my level of English. I meant what I wrote, because although I don't know Olfa Yokoubi, I've often seen this behavior very often in the almost last 20 years. That's why I wonder about the odds that the first edit after my 2 opposes is right away a decline here. Olfa, you will have to recognize that if my opposes didn't play a role in your oppose it looks at least suspicious. Still I'm happy to read that you confirm otherwise. Poco a poco (talk) 13:03, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
- Your English is absolutely fine, Poco. Best to leave this whole nonsensical discussion. Cmao20 (talk) 13:28, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
- You're right, Poco poco; it wasn't my place to interpret what you meant or judge your English. I'm sorry, it was a mistake on my part. I'll leave Wilfredor (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
- I agree, Cmao20, let's move on Poco a poco (talk) 20:09, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for your assessment, Cmao20, but I think the motivation for the vote is not based on the picture itselft. I just realised that when I went through all current FP candidates yesterday morning I opposed the 2 noms of Olfa Yakoubi because none of them convinced me in terms of level of detail. The first edit he/she did afterwards was coming here to oppose this candidate (and second oppose in his FP record, what are the odds?). Definitely unfair but nothing unusual. Poco a poco (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Support The way the chairs are cut off at the bottom is a bit annoying; I would have cut it at the level of the stairs, but that's more of a personal decision than a technically valid one. The chandelier also obstructs the view of the dome, but I understand it's a necessary sacrifice since it's not something that can be removed. Thank you for this nomination. I have a similar one from another church, and I had my doubts about whether this type of composition would be accepted, but I agree that not all wide-angle distortion needs to be corrected, especially if the result would create a completely disproportionate image. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:17, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 09:53, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:49, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2026 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:48, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
Weak oppose per Olfa, great quality and the wide angle doesn't bother me much but the image does have distracting elements (chairs and chandelier) and I'm unconvinced by the crop. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 19:41, 31 May 2026 (UTC)