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

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

62,358 closed valued image candidates
Closed as		Nominations
Promoted	56,224 (90.2%)
Undecided	3,520 (5.6%)
Declined	2,614 (4.2%)

New valued image nominations

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-06 23:04 (UTC)
Scope: Church of the Theotokos (Gorno Selo), exterior view from south-east
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century church, which is famous for its highly decorated apse, portals and frames. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Comment The scope is too vague. For a church, it would be useful to add to the scope: View from the apse.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Archaeodontosaurus: I’ve added the direction in the scope. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:58, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

View
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-02-07 09:01 (UTC)
Scope: Chapel of the former Saint Julien Hospital of Cambrai – Nord - France
Reason: The building is listed as a historic monument in France. -- JackyM59 (talk)
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose => undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:01, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

}}

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-08 12:33 (UTC)
Scope: Parthenos sylvia gambrisius (Clipper) dorsal
Comment The specimen is very damaged; it is difficult to use it as a reference. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:18, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-08 12:36 (UTC)
Scope: Gradište (Grad), archaeological site
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this archaeological site, which was identified as the late antique Roman town of Armonia. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 07:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-08 12:43 (UTC)
Scope: Trpče Church, archaeological site
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this archaeological site, which is classified as a medieval settlement with a church and necropolis. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Comment I think this one is better, the foreground is brighter --Pierre André ^(talk) 09:09, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Pierre André Leclercq: I've replaced the nominated image with that one. Thank you for finding it. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:11, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Useful and used. --Pierre André ^(talk) 17:30, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2026-02-08 14:07 (UTC)
Scope: Hôtel de la préfecture de l'Aveyron, Rodez
Support Useful --Llez (talk) 06:36, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-02-08 22:39 (UTC)
Scope: Rabcewicz-Gebäude, west view
Reason: A building of Technical University Leoben; other views of the building have been promoted to VI already. -- Aciarium (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Aciarium (talk) on 2026-02-08 22:44 (UTC)
Scope: Parkstraße 31, Leoben, southwest view
Reason: A building of Technical University Leoben; other views of the building have been promoted to VI already. -- Aciarium (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2026-02-08 22:56 (UTC)
Scope: Avifauna Reserve of the Hâble d'Ault. (Woignarue), view from Hutte Blaize
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of the Hâble d'Ault, which is a national cultural heritage site in France. -- Pierre André ^(talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-09 09:48 (UTC)
Scope: Supreme Headquarters of NOV and POM Memorial Museum, aerial view
Reason: I think this is the most representative aerial view of this museum, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-09 09:49 (UTC)
Scope: OZNA Memorial Museum, exterior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this museum, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-09 10:10 (UTC)
Scope: St. Petka Church (Brajčino), exterior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 15th-century monastery church, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-09 11:04 (UTC)
Scope: Papilio polytes romulus (Common mormon) male dorsal
Oppose maybe the best in scope, but in that position wings aren't shown well, sorry. --Gower (talk) 07:48, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Declined if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-09 11:05 (UTC)
Scope: Papilio polytes romulus (Common mormon) male underside
Oppose that one is better and with undamaged wing tails: File:Close wing puddling position of male Papilio polytes Linnaeus, 1758 - Common Mormon.jpg, sorry --Gower (talk) 07:52, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Declined if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-10 06:19 (UTC)
Scope: *Flutes - Aztec culture - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:30, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-10 06:24 (UTC)
Scope: *Polychrome footed bowl decorated with a lizard - Gran Coclé culture - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Comment I think this item falls under the Category:Gran Coclé pottery.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] * Done User talk:Famberhorst Indeed, there was an error, thank you for your always constructive vigilance... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:49, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-10 08:03 (UTC)
Scope: Topolnica, granary
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this wooden granary. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support important example of rural architecture I suppose, useful --Gower (talk) 13:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-10 08:16 (UTC)
Scope: Village pump in Bašibos, Bašibos memorial pump
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this memorial pump, which is dedicated to the successes achieved by the Bulgarian military on the Macedonian front in World War I. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 07:53, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-10 08:18 (UTC)
Scope: Dojran Hammam
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this former Ottoman hammmam, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 07:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-02-10 11:59 (UTC)
Scope: *scope= Summer - 1573* by Arcimboldo - Musée du Louvre-Lens**
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:04, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-02-10 12:00 (UTC)
Scope: Autumn - 1573 by Arcimboldo - Musée du Louvre-Lens
Best in Scope but @JackyM59: why one version has floral framing and other just black background? It was modified during restoration? --Gower (talk) 12:10, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Info- I asked myself the same question.They were restored in 2024 before being exhibited for two years at the Louvre Lens. The frame must cover them. ~~Oppose~~ There are two different versions of this painting (with and without a floral frame). It would be good to create a category for each one.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:03, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Info The 2024 restoration covered the flowers to restore the original work and create a black background that increases the contrast. I will create a category called ‘Before the 2024 restoration’ [[1]]. --JackyM59 (talk) 12:26, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Info Category created and sorted. You're right, it will be clearer. Tomorrow I'll do the same for the other seasons. -- JackyM59 (talk) 12:39, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done --JackyM59 (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:04, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-10 09:56 (UTC)
Scope: Hebomoia glaucippe glaucippe (Great orange tips) mating
Support good and probably only one in scope --Gower (talk) 08:28, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-10 09:59 (UTC)
Scope: Lexias dirtea agosthena (Archduke) male dorsal
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-10 11:57 (UTC)
Scope: Celastrina lavendularis limbata (Plain hedge blue) underside
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2026-02-10 13:24 (UTC)
Scope: W-1 building of University of Technology in Kraków, exterior
Reason: Main building of the important university with Dean’s office, historical building of former Austian barracks. -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Atudu (talk) on 2026-02-10
Scope: Coeliccia renifera (Kidney-spotted Sylvan),male Lateral view
Support useful as only one in scope --Gower (talk) 07:55, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2026-02-10 18:28 (UTC)
Scope: 15 Wały Generała Sikorskiego in Toruń, exterior
Reason: Bank building designed by Marian Lalewicz, cultural heritage monument with own article -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:38, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-11 06:27 (UTC)
Scope: Grandinenia fuchsi ssp. pygmaea, shell
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:52, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-11 06:22 (UTC)
Scope: *An allegory of America adorned and dressed in animal skins - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Note: I can't find the photo in Category:Musée des Amériques - Sculptures. Could it be in another category, or am I not looking properly?--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:58, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done Oops, Correction made, thank you for your vigilance --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:10, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:06, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-11 07:01 (UTC)
Scope: Berger et ses moutons dans les Causses - Henri Martin - Musée de Cahors Henri-Martin
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:28, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:06, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Paramanu Sarkar (talk) on 2026-02-11 08:00 (UTC)
Scope: Pterocles exustus (Chestnut-bellied Sandgrouse) - male
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:29, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Paramanu Sarkar (talk) on 2026-02-11 08:06 (UTC)
Scope: Pterocles exustus (Chestnut-bellied Sandgrouse) - female
very good photo but hard to choose the best, that one has with lower resolution good distinction from the background: File:Sandgrouse.jpg --Gower (talk) 08:23, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Gower: Can you please check, this image is a little more sharp with more feather details than the one you provided. Both are good images, rest is up to you, thank you. - Paramanu Sarkar (talk) 08:46, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Tagooty (talk) on 2026-02-11 08:26 (UTC)
Scope: All India Council for Technical Education Head Office building, front facade
Used in: en:All India Council for Technical Education • wikidata:Q137947251
Comment A small problem needs fixing on the left side; and on the right side, it would be good to straighten the leaning building.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Archaeodontosaurus: Done Thanks for pointing these out. --Tagooty (talk) 08:12, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Thanks Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:16, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-11 09:41 (UTC)
Scope: Elymnias hypermnestra violetta (Common palmfly) underside
Best in Scope It's a shame it's not being used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-11 09:44 (UTC)
Scope: Hypolycaena erylus himavantus (Common tit) male dorsal
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-11 09:46 (UTC)
Scope: Hypolycaena erylus himavantus (Common tit) male underside
Support Useful and very used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 20:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-11 23:50 (UTC)
Scope: St. Stephen's Church (Šipokno), exterior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 13th-century monastery church, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-11 23:53 (UTC)
Scope: Nativity of the Theotokos Church (Kostinci), exterior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 17th-century church, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-12 00:06 (UTC)
Scope: St. Nicholas Church (Belica), exterior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 16th-century church, which is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 07:57, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2026-02-12 05:28 (UTC)
Scope: *Typical rootstock of a Ulmus laevis.* European white elm.**
Comment There are a large number of images of European white elm in CAT:Ulmus laevis. This image needs to be compared with all images of buttress roots of the species, not only those in one arboretum. The appropriate linked Category for the scope, I believe, is Category:Buttress roots of Ulmus laevis. --Tagooty (talk) 04:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done. Categories removed. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:57, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] The scope is better named after the Category "Buttress roots of Ulmus laevis (European white elm)". There are 22 images in the category, many look alike to me, I am unable to form an opinion Neutral. --Tagooty (talk) 09:05, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Tagooty: Sorry, I made a mistake. The correct rootstocks are now listed in the category. Thank you for your time with my photo.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-12 06:25 (UTC)
Scope: Paphia euglypta (Well-carved Venus), right valve
Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:23, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-12 06:27 (UTC)
Scope: A Mountain. Montseny. Sunset by Marià Pidelaserra - Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 07:11, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-12 06:28 (UTC)
Scope: *Statuette of Chalchiuhtlicue - Aztec culture - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Tagooty (talk) on 2026-02-12 08:20 (UTC)
Scope: Bou Jeloud Mosque, Fez, Morocco
Used in: wikidata:Q85748417 • en: Bou Jeloud Mosque • ar:جامع بوجلود • ca:Mesquita de Bou Jeloud
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 07:57, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Uoaei1 (talk) on 2026-02-12 09:26 (UTC)
Scope: Kirche Maria Rojach - Flügelaltar − total view
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:30, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: JackyM59 (talk) on 2026-02-12 09:36 (UTC)
Scope: The Woman with the Flea by Giuseppe Maria Crespi - Musée du Louvre - Paris
Comment translation not accurate enough.Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:30, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Info Correction made. Thank you. -- JackyM59 (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Thanks, but not quite right. In English we always use fleas not flea. I would choose Woman with fleas, but perhaps Archaeodontosaurus can help? Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:39, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done I do not know English and use https://www.deepl.com/fr/translator -JackyM59 (talk) 12:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Info The English title is "Searcher for Flea" https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crespi,_Giuseppe_Maria_-_Searcher_for_Fleas_-_1720s.png ~~Oppose~~ The scope is wrong: in French and in Italian (he is an Italian painter) there is only one flea. It would be good to modify the category and scope. There are also other tables on the same subject and always with a flea.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:52, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done Category and Scope updated based on the Louvre's entry. Thank you for the clarification. [https://collections.louvre.fr/ark:/53355/cl010063526
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-12 10:20 (UTC)
Scope: Cheritra freja evansi (Common imperial) underside
Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 04:01, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-12 10:23 (UTC)
Scope: Anthene emolus (Common ciliate blue) underside
Support Useful and very used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-12 10:24 (UTC)
Scope: Troides aeacus aeacus (Golden birdwing) female about to lay egg
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:09, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-12 22:54 (UTC)
Scope: St. John the Baptist Church (Beranci), exterior view from south-east
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 19th-century monastery church, which is famous for its cross-in-square architecture. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Comment Please add the direction of view (eg. front facade, etc). Otherwise good. --Tagooty (talk) 03:57, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done I’ve added the direction of view in the scope. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:16, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 03:01, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-12 23:00 (UTC)
Scope: Church of Christ's Resurrection (Dedebalci), exterior
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this church, which is famous for its highly decorated architecture. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-12 23:02 (UTC)
Scope: Marčino
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this village. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Comment aerial view is perhaps better to show village layout and we have one: File:Поглед на Марчино 4.jpg --Gower (talk) 07:59, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Gower: I’ve replaced the nominated picture with the one you pointed out to. Thanks for finding it. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 11:56, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Tagooty (talk) on 2026-02-13 03:47 (UTC)
Scope: Sidi-Boughaba Lake - central section, view to northwest
Used in: ar:محمية سيدي بوغابة • wikidata:Q3483143 • wikidata:Q138208302
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:03, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-13 06:23 (UTC)
Scope: *Chiriqui pottery - Tripod vase decorated with lizards - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:14, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-13 06:25 (UTC)
Scope: Cathédrale Sainte-Cécile d'Albi - 'Sanctus Amarandus martyr albiensis'
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:13, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-13 06:33 (UTC)
Scope: Paphia euglypta (Well-carved Venus), left valve
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:13, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2026-02-13 09:00 (UTC)
Scope: Museo delle Terme di Diocleziano - Little cloister, Rome
Support Useful.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2026-02-13 10:52 (UTC)
Scope: Mosaic of the musicians by Dioskourides of Samos - Musée du Louvre-Lens
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:12, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-13 11:25 (UTC)
Scope: Zemeros flegyas allica (Punchinello) dorsal
Support useful, only one in scope --Gower (talk) 08:00, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-13 11:28 (UTC)
Scope: Hyarotis adrastus (Tree flitter) underside; on Chinese ixora (Ixora chinensis)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:06, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-13 11:31 (UTC)
Scope: Zizina otis sangra (Lesser grass blues) mating
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Uoaei1 (talk) on 2026-02-13 11:40 (UTC)
Scope: Interior of Catholic church St. Laurentius (Langenlois) − east view
Support Useful.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:04, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Uoaei1 (talk) on 2026-02-13 11:45 (UTC)
Scope: St. Ulrich (Lavant) − east view
Best in Scope --Gower (talk) 13:29, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Earth605 (talk) on 2026-02-13 15:55 (UTC)
Scope: Sarotherodon galilaeus
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:07, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-13 22:08 (UTC)
Scope: Lupulella mesomelas mesomelas (Cape black-backed jackal), frontal view
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:08, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-13 22:08 (UTC)
Scope: Lamprotornis nitens phoenicopterus (Cape starling), rear view
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:08, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-13 22:08 (UTC)
Scope: Lamprotornis nitens phoenicopterus (Cape starling), lateral view
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-14 00:17 (UTC)
Scope: Salahudin Ajubi Mosque, exterior
Reason: This is the only picture of this mosque with a very unusual architecture. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful --Llez (talk) 07:42, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-14 00:24 (UTC)
Scope: St. Nicholas Church (Mrzen Oraovec), bell tower
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this 16th-century bell tower, which together with the church is a national cultural heritage site. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:23, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-14 00:28 (UTC)
Scope: St. Demetrius Church (Kumaničevo), exterior view from north-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 2026-02-14 00:36 (UTC)
Scope: Puzderci, view from south
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this village. @Tagooty: I've re-nominated the picture as the previous nomination was closed shortly after you had left your comment. I've added the direction in the scope. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-14 06:02 (UTC)
Scope: *Chiriqui pottery - Zoomorphic vase with neck D94.1.11A Chiriqui Culture Costa Rica - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:22, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-14 06:06 (UTC)
Scope: Albi Cathedral - Eagle lectern
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:22, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-14 07:40 (UTC)
Scope: Tapes platyptycha, right valve
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:21, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-14 11:06 (UTC)
Scope: Junonia rhadama (Brilliant blue) female dorsal
Oppose maybe the best in scope, but very unsharp (per criterion 3), sorry --Gower (talk) 08:08, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-14 11:08 (UTC)
Scope: **Zizeeria knysna (African grass blue) underside; on Arnica**
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-14 11:10 (UTC)
Scope: Heteropsis narcissus narcissus underside
@Charlesjsharp: not geocoded, otherwise the best --Gower (talk) 08:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Done Sorry. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:41, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-14 14:18 (UTC)
Scope: Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus (Cape fur seal), bulls, fighting
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-14 14:19 (UTC)
Scope: Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus (Cape fur seal), bull, vocalizing
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-14 14:19 (UTC)
Scope: Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus (Cape fur seal), jumping out of the water
Support Useful and used.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:02, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2026-02-14 17:24 (UTC)
Scope: Wall-painting-Necropolis-of-Cyre, Musée du Louvre-Lens
Support Useful.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2026-02-14 17:55 (UTC)
Scope: Flammulina velutipes on the broken saw cut of a willow branch. (Enokitake)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:14, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-14 18:24 (UTC)
Scope: Azorinus chamasolen, right valve
Support Useful.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:44, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-14 23:30 (UTC)
Scope: Bozovce, view from north-east
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this village -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-14 23:35 (UTC)
Scope: Vešala, aerial view
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Kiril Simeonovski (talk) on 2026-02-14 23:37 (UTC)
Scope: Lisec, aerial view
Reason: I think this is the most representative picture of this village. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk)
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-15 06:46 (UTC)
Scope: *Chiriqui pottery - Anthropozoomorphic statuette (feline woman) Chiriqui Culture Costa Rica - Musée des Amériques* - Auch**
Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 09:07, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2026-02-15 06:55 (UTC)
Scope: *Capitole from Toulouse, Les amoureux, by Henri Martin*
Best in Scope the highest quality (very interesting painting BTW) --Gower (talk) 08:06, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2026-02-15 07:10 (UTC)
Scope: 26 Piastowska Street in Prudnik, exterior
Reason: Former Pinkus family villa, seat of private library, now school building; cultural heritage monument in Poland. -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2026-02-15 07:38 (UTC)
Scope: Jewish cemetery in Głogówek
Reason: A cultural heritage monument in Poland with its own Wikipedia article. -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gower (talk) on 2026-02-15 07:43 (UTC)
Scope: Clock tower of IV Lyceum in Bytom
Reason: One of the most distinctive architectural features and symbols of the city of Bytom. A part of the cultural heritage monument in Poland with its own Wikipedia article. -- Gower (talk)
Support Useful and used -- Giles Laurent (talk) 14:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-15 09:05 (UTC)
Scope: Tapes platyptycha, left valve
= Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 11:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-15 12:09 (UTC)
Scope: Coeliades forestan forestan (Striped policeman) underside
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-15 12:11 (UTC)
Scope: Megisba malaya sikkima (Malayan) underside
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2026-02-15 12:13 (UTC)
Scope: Lethe confusa apara (Banded treebrown) underside
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-15 14:42 (UTC)
Scope: Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus (Cape fur seal), heads, juveniles fighting
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-15 14:42 (UTC)
Scope: Pelecanus onocrotalus (Great white pelican) in flight, side view showing wing upperside
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Giles Laurent (talk) on 2026-02-15 14:42 (UTC)
Scope: Pycnonotus nigricans nigricans (African red-eyed bulbul), ventral view
Support very good (QI) and useful --Gower (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Llez (talk) on 2026-02-15 17:30 (UTC)
Scope: Codakia orbicularis (American Tiger Lucina), left valve
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.