A few opening points:
- it's a good idea to put a blank line between images so we can consider each properly and independently... the way you posted they share borders.
- it's a good idea to number them by putting #1, #2 etc immediately before each, so we can conveniently refer to them using those numbers
#1: I very rarely like images with significant blown areas: can't say this is an exception. Otherwise, I like the texture of the concrete, the colours in the upper window matching those elsewhere on the wall, and the foreground tree, but the latter occupies too little area if the picture, and showing half the bottom window tends to attract the eye and lead it out of the image.
#2: ok. The most interesting thing in your image - the tree - is lit on the hidden side, so the visible side is low contrast and doesn't present a lot of satisfying detail. The shadows improve the image, but aren't strong enough to be features countering the issue with lighting the trunk. So, ok but needing something more to make it special.
#3: very good... sweeping curves for lead-in lines, one of which disappears in the corner (generally a good idea), horizontal divisions approximate the Rule of Thirds placement, person on the bridge might ideally be further left and walking into the space, lit road visible under the bridge is good, not having anything horizontal makes the viewer struggle for orientation but it seems likely nothing was horizontal, no particular place provides more satisfying detail than others so there's no clear subject. Eye follows road but nothing flows on from T intersection, so searches for other lines to follow in the walls at the right with the brighter concrete tiles, then the bridge, but none of those connect to anything within the image.
#4: I'm not sure what you're trying to do with this image, but having the background framed so the base of objects/buildings isn't visible ruins any chance for me.
#5: massive distortion or verticals, glare, (for me) no interesting subject matter, crooked horizon, lack of balance, buildings half-included, a car that's just off central placement and facing the nearer edge... sorry, but this seems like you've gone out of your way to make a bad picture...
#6: again, you're framing without including the base of objects (in this case trees)... very rarely a good idea. Viewers want to see things grounded, as it supports the sense of depth. This image seems to be about the clouds (ok, nice to have clouds and blue sky, but not enough to make a picture) and one nice tree (might be enough, but this one's not).