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.
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.
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
DeclinedVICs 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. UndecidedVICs 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 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:
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 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.
Comment I recognize that given the habitat range of this second largest cat in the Americas, the taxonomy is complicated with more than one common name. Cougars as the second largest cat in the Americas, are known by different names – Andean puma, puma, mountain lion, cougar (most common), or, in the South American culture sense – “a snatcher of souls” or “helper of people”.
I was just looking for your rationale in your use of "puma" versus, say, "Andean puma" or "South American cougar" for the Puma concolor concolor. In the Wikipedia topic where this image is featured, the caption calls it a “South American cougar”. Your thoughts? --GRDN711 (talk) 17:41, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Read the entire discussion and was not enlightened. IMO this cat is a cougar that has about 40 different names (scientific, common, colloquial) depending on the country and culture. Although I am not sure you won the discussion argument, I will accept your scope of "Puma concolor concolor (Puma) female". --GRDN711 (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose il y a déjà une image promue avec ce scope il ne peux pas y en avoir deux. Par contre si le scope est modifier en : Monument à Vercingétorix (le monument inclus la statue et le piédestal) alors le scope est recevable. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Archaeodontosaurus: En fait, il y a déjà deux VI avec le même scope : celle-ci étant plus ancienne. Je n'ai pas l'habitude du fonctionnement des VIC (désolé), mais ce que je crois comprendre après avoir lu les règles, c'est que je devrais ouvrir une Most valid review pour proposer que la photo que je propose devienne VI à la place des deux déjà validées, c'est bien ça ? --Benji07:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Non cette voie est un cul-de-sac plus personne ne s'en occupe. En fait les scopes doivent être diffèrent. c'est tout si tu change le scope en disant Monument à Vercingétorix c'est correct.
Comment C'est un cul de sac ? Mais il y a pas un bot ? C'est vrai que ça fait des mois qu'il y a des procédures en cours. On peut les fermer manuellement, mais on dirait bien que tout le monde a la flemme (pour parler franchement), ou ne sait pas faire (comme moi). Mais sinon, oui, il faudrait mettre ta photo en compétition dans cette section avec les autres déjà VI pour ce même scope. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merci pour vos conseils ! Bon j'ai essayé de proposer une MVR ... on verra si ça donne quelque chose, sinon tant pis. --Benji14:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment@E bailey: Scope-link cateogry is fine but the name of this ship is not "Cruise Ship".
Just like a bird species is identified uniquely by a combination of scientific name and common name, a ship is identified uniquely with the name on the hull along with a universal ID number such as an IMO hull number. Suggest you use a scope similar to [[:Category: National Geographic Gemini (ship, 2001) | National Geographic ''Gemini'' – IMO 9228368]] --GRDN711 (talk) 06:33, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for the tip. This ship changed names and it wasn't clear to me how to scope this to all names that it has had. I have updated the scope. --E bailey (talk) 14:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A truly significant photograph from that tragic and heroic time. The protester is wearing an SSh-40 helmet (a 1940 steel helmet, manufactured for the Soviet army in tens of millions). Other protesters also used plastic construction helmets, miners' helmets, and motorcycle helmets. Police and firefighters wore their service helmets. Therefore, i suggest specifying the helmet type in scope: A protester wearing an SSh-40 helmet during the 2014 Euromaidan protests in Kyiv.
The photo is not well illustrative for the current scope. Both sides of the conflict made extensive use of helmets. Therefore, i propose "A Protester" rather than a "men." Second, the protesters used various types of helmets, including sports bicycle and motorcycle helmets, plastic helmets for construction workers and miners, and even kitchen pots. It's visually impossible to distinguish between Soviet military helmets like the SSh-40, SSh-60, and SSh-68. Therefore, i propose a category like "a protester wearing a soviet military helmet..." -- George Chernilevskytalk21:11, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reason:
On November 12th would have been the 90th birthday of People's Artist of the USSR Lyudmila Gurchenko, a legend of theater and cinema who captivated the nation with her leading role in Carnival Night, and whose style in subsequent films soon inspired many women to emulate her. Until last year, Wikimedia Commons had no portrait photographs of her, and the entry for the article in various languages only featured a profile photo, which is actually a cropped image from the ceremony where she was awarded the Order "For Merit to the Fatherland" 2nd Class, exactly three months before her death. This photograph was taken by the renowned photographer Igor Gnevashev, and I nominate it in their memory. -- MasterRus21thCentury (talk)
Support Proposed image is definitely the better VI of the two. While this one shows the paws a little better, proposed image has better overall quality and more valuable. --GRDN711 (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Neither of the two images is VI, so Most Valued Review is not the right place for these. If you intended to nominate a Valued Image, choose the best one and put it at the bottom of the "New valued image nominations" section --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 11:07, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment Neither of the two images is VI, so Most Valued Review is not the right place for these. If you intended to nominate a Valued Image, choose the best one and put it at the bottom of the "New valued image nominations" section --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 11:07, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Au chat barré, ancien estaminet avenue du Peuple Belge (Lille)
Support Not only the two bats' eyes, limbs, and body hairs spot on focus by a whole magnitude as compared to its predecessor but also the shoots protruding from the tree's bough. Naturally appealing colours and overall superior quality are both a nod to a skilled photographer and a boon achieved by 10 years of technical progress. A worthy replacement! -- Franz van Duns (talk) 20:23, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 11:07, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I have checked this submision against the six VI criteria. AS this is a studio image, the geocoding requirement is not neccessary. In my opinion this submission meets the other five critieria. I would however recommend changing the scope from "Portraits of Karl Marx" (plural) to "Portrait of Karl Marx". (Singular) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvl (talk • contribs) 14:28, December 20, 2015 (UTC)
Info Since the image in question is in both scopes (parent and daughter), I have removed the parent scope from the image, retaining the daughter scope. The visible text of the new scope is unchanged. See below. Martinvl (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Reason:
Nearly similar view but higher detail level. -- Wolf im Wald
Support Compared to its predecessor this image is of far superior quality: detailing the imposing and enormously intricate brick- and stonework, flawlessly rendered and stitched, perfect verticals, exactly centered. Such an undertaking is not at all easy, as I know, and thus gives great credit to the photographer's efforts & skills. Seen at full size it is a one-of-a-kind image that not only exhibits a complete view of this edifice but also highlights and spotlights all the fine details of craftmanship combined in its construction. A joy to explore this image, simply phenomenal! -- Franz van Duns (talk) 20:02, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 11:07, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose il y a déjà une image promue avec ce scope il ne peux pas y en avoir deux. Par contre si le scope est modifier en : Monument à Vercingétorix (le monument inclus la statue et le piédestal) alors le scope est recevable. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Archaeodontosaurus: En fait, il y a déjà deux VI avec le même scope : celle-ci étant plus ancienne. Je n'ai pas l'habitude du fonctionnement des VIC (désolé), mais ce que je crois comprendre après avoir lu les règles, c'est que je devrais ouvrir une Most valid review pour proposer que la photo que je propose devienne VI à la place des deux déjà validées, c'est bien ça ? --Benji07:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Non cette voie est un cul-de-sac plus personne ne s'en occupe. En fait les scopes doivent être diffèrent. c'est tout si tu change le scope en disant Monument à Vercingétorix c'est correct.
Comment C'est un cul de sac ? Mais il y a pas un bot ? C'est vrai que ça fait des mois qu'il y a des procédures en cours. On peut les fermer manuellement, mais on dirait bien que tout le monde a la flemme (pour parler franchement), ou ne sait pas faire (comme moi). Mais sinon, oui, il faudrait mettre ta photo en compétition dans cette section avec les autres déjà VI pour ce même scope. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merci pour vos conseils ! Bon j'ai essayé de proposer une MVR ... on verra si ça donne quelque chose, sinon tant pis. --Benji14:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Skip to image nominations
_female_Leona_Amarga.jpg)
.jpg)
_Cathédrale_Sainte_Marie,_chapelle_de_la_Purification_(8)_-_Retable.jpg)
_Bouteille_anthropomorphe_-_Dignitaire_de_haut_rang_-_Musée_des_Amériques_-_Auch.jpg)
_Chiloe.jpg)
_feeding_Tricao.jpg)
_Chœur_de_la_cathédrale_d'Auch_-_Reliquaire_de_St_Austinde.jpg)
_Bouteille_à_col_représentant_un_jaguar_-_Pérou_-_Musée_des_Amériques_–_Auch.jpg)
_swimming_Tricao.jpg)
_male_Leona_Amarga.jpg)
_02.jpg)
_Xyphosia_miliaria_on_Cirsium_arvense.jpg)
_Trésor_de_la_cathédrale_-_Dominique_de_Vic,_archevêque_d'Auch.jpg)
_Têtes_de_massue_en_étoile_-_Cuivre_-_Culture_inca_-_Pérou_-_Musée_des_Amériques_–_Auch.jpg)
_in_flight_Tricao.jpg)
_Chiloe_2.jpg)
_landing_Leona_Amarga.jpg)
_Trésor_de_la_cathédrale_d'Auch_-_Buste_reliquaire_de_Christine_de_Tyr.jpg)
_inflorescence_of_Cornus_sanguinea_with_Nezara_antennata_larva.jpg)
_Vase_représentant_un_sacrifice_-_culture_mochica_-_Pérou_-_Musée_des_Amériques_–_Auch.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_Masque_funéraire_-_Basse_époque_(664.332_av._J.-C.).jpg)
_L'escalier_monumental_vu_du_Boulevard_Sadi_Carnot_à_Auch.jpg)
_Meidling.jpg)
.jpg)
_Rio_Napo.jpg)
.jpg)
_female_Leona_Amarga.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Cathédrale_Sainte_Marie,_chapelle_de_la_Purification_(8)_-_Retable.jpg){kind=link}
_Cath%C3%A9drale_Sainte_Marie,_chapelle_de_la_Purification_(8)_-_Retable.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Bouteille_anthropomorphe_-_Dignitaire_de_haut_rang_-_Musée_des_Amériques_-_Auch.jpg){kind=link}
_Bouteille_anthropomorphe_-_Dignitaire_de_haut_rang_-_Mus%C3%A9e_des_Am%C3%A9riques_-_Auch.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Chiloe.jpg){kind=link}
_Chiloe.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_feeding_Tricao.jpg){kind=link}
_feeding_Tricao.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Chœur_de_la_cathédrale_d'Auch_-_Reliquaire_de_St_Austinde.jpg){kind=link}
_Ch%C5%93ur_de_la_cath%C3%A9drale_d%27Auch_-_Reliquaire_de_St_Austinde.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Bouteille_à_col_représentant_un_jaguar_-_Pérou_-_Musée_des_Amériques_–_Auch.jpg){kind=link}
_Bouteille_%C3%A0_col_repr%C3%A9sentant_un_jaguar_-_P%C3%A9rou_-_Mus%C3%A9e_des_Am%C3%A9riques_%E2%80%93_Auch.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_swimming_Tricao.jpg){kind=link}
_swimming_Tricao.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_male_Leona_Amarga.jpg){kind=link}
_male_Leona_Amarga.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_03.jpg){kind=link}
_Xyphosia_miliaria_on_Cirsium_arvense.jpg){kind=link}
_Xyphosia_miliaria_on_Cirsium_arvense.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Trésor_de_la_cathédrale_-_Dominique_de_Vic,_archevêque_d'Auch.jpg){kind=link}
_Tr%C3%A9sor_de_la_cath%C3%A9drale_-_Dominique_de_Vic,_archev%C3%AAque_d%27Auch.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Têtes_de_massue_en_étoile_-_Cuivre_-_Culture_inca_-_Pérou_-_Musée_des_Amériques_–_Auch.jpg){kind=link}
_T%C3%AAtes_de_massue_en_%C3%A9toile_-_Cuivre_-_Culture_inca_-_P%C3%A9rou_-_Mus%C3%A9e_des_Am%C3%A9riques_%E2%80%93_Auch.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_in_flight_Tricao.jpg){kind=link}
_in_flight_Tricao.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Chiloe_2.jpg){kind=link}
_Chiloe_2.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_landing_Leona_Amarga.jpg){kind=link}
_landing_Leona_Amarga.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Trésor_de_la_cathédrale_d'Auch_-_Buste_reliquaire_de_Christine_de_Tyr.jpg){kind=link}
_Tr%C3%A9sor_de_la_cath%C3%A9drale_d%27Auch_-_Buste_reliquaire_de_Christine_de_Tyr.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_inflorescence_of_Cornus_sanguinea_with_Nezara_antennata_larva.jpg){kind=link}
_inflorescence_of_Cornus_sanguinea_with_Nezara_antennata_larva.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Vase_représentant_un_sacrifice_-_culture_mochica_-_Pérou_-_Musée_des_Amériques_–_Auch.jpg){kind=link}
_Vase_repr%C3%A9sentant_un_sacrifice_-_culture_mochica_-_P%C3%A9rou_-_Mus%C3%A9e_des_Am%C3%A9riques_%E2%80%93_Auch.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Masque_funéraire_-_Basse_époque_(664.332_av._J.-C.).jpg){kind=link}
_Masque_fun%C3%A9raire_-_Basse_%C3%A9poque_(664.332_av._J.-C.).jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_L'escalier_monumental_vu_du_Boulevard_Sadi_Carnot_à_Auch.jpg){kind=link}
_L%27escalier_monumental_vu_du_Boulevard_Sadi_Carnot_%C3%A0_Auch.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Meidling.jpg){kind=link}
_Meidling.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
_Rio_Napo.jpg){kind=link}
_Rio_Napo.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
