User talk:Taxiarchos228/Archive2012

Archive:
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019

(QICpromoted pictures, edit)

Parispanorama

Erster Versuch. Default vom neuesten Hugin, ohne Farbspielereien, mit leichten mauellen keypoint-Optimierungen

Hallo, Wladyslav. Vielleicht etwas spaet, aber hier habe ich mal angefangen, an deinem paris-panorama zu arbeiten. Turm zentriert, Himmel restauriert (ganz einfach mit Gimp-resynthesizer). Oh, ich sehe gerade unten links ist noch Luft. An den Farben koennte ich noch arbeiten. Aber ansonsten sieht das stitching erstmal nicht schlecht aus. Wo ich's mir gerade nochmal bei 100% im Gimp anschaue, sehe ich, dass ich bnoch vertikale guides im rechten Bildbereich setzen muss. Ok, Du hoerst in einem Jahr nochmal von mir ;-) --Dschwen (talk) 23:27, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Es ist aber auch so schon deutlich besser als mein erster Versuch. Danke soweit. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

* * * Happy New 2012 Year! * * *

-- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:24, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, for you too. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wieden - Pfarrkirche Allerheiligen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 15:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)If it is the same building here, one of the two has wrong colors.--Jebulon 20:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wieden - Pfarrkirche Allerheiligen3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 15:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)If it is the same building here, one of the two has wrong colors.--Jebulon 20:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Image guidelines - downsampling

Hello. There have been many inconsistencies regarding the evaluation of images in Commons, mainly on the issue of resolution and sharpness. I think we should agree upon a uniform policy, and try to reach a consensus. I started a new discussion on the matter of downsampling, if you would like to share your view. Thank you. Gidip (talk) 17:50, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schopfheim - Alte Stadtkirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, but tilted CW--Lmbuga 11:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC) corrected now --Taxiarchos228 19:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC) Good quality--Lmbuga 19:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC) To me it's now a bit tilted, but I'm not sure. The text is not straight, but I don't know where is you when you toke the image--Lmbuga 19:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC) Is the white balance correct? Wall appears slightly red/pink. --NorbertNagel 22:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Füssen - Klosterkirche St. Mang29.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The light could be better, but it is good enough for QI. --Haeferl 16:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Villa Aichele1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Schöne Aufnahme! --Haeferl 21:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Josefskirche - Glockenturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 15:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus Haagen3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Die Komposition ist nicht ganz nach meinem Geschmack, aber die Qualität ist gut. --Haeferl 19:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Füssen - Klosterkirche St. Mang1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not everybody will be pleased with the "shift lens effect" or the lighting, but for me it's an excellent image. -- MJJR 22:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Kingston City Hall.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:35, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. George's Cathedral (Kingston) (exterior) in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, solar system, universe.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Kingston ? Kingston ? Kingston ? Kingston ? or Kingston ? Or another Kingston ? Maybe the scope is not precise enough...--Jebulon (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

• how many possibilitys can it be with Category:Churches in Kingston, Ontario as upper category? --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:56, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
• my question was only about the scope, and not the category. Sometimes, it happens that scopes are different of categories. It is the case here, IMO. Furthermore, it is usual to add "exterior" for such buildings.--Jebulon (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
  • As there are (until now) no interior pictures I did't specifyed it. Instead of writing never ending dialogs you could add it yourself if you find it so important. I do not as I argued. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
• ...But I love writing never ending dialogs, especially with you, my dear friend ! You are always so kind, it is a real pleasure !--Jebulon (talk) 20:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Sadly your comments concerning my pictures are running more and more like a troll. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Best in scope. The dialog ends. Sadly.--Jebulon (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I am not the "troll" who wrote this provocative scope...--Jebulon (talk) 14:47, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Royal York Hotel, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support The result was well worth the risk to let your wife drive:-) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Towards all prejudices concerning women and their driving ability and she is a good driver, so just a very calculable risk :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
• As we have pictures of the interior of this hotel maybe the add of "exterior" in the scope could be better, as usual for buildings. Thanks in advance.--Jebulon (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Josefskirche - Langhaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments endlich mal ein Lörracher Kirchenbild :-) --Ralf Roletschek 15:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Linderhof 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 08:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Linderhof 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice! --Iifar 09:07, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossbergschule2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Iifar 09:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Linderhof4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments könnte schärfer sein, dennoch mMn QI --Carschten 21:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Villa Rosenfels2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments gut --Carschten 21:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossbergschule5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments sehr gut --Carschten 21:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Alte Halle1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments gut --Carschten 21:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC) But halo.--Jebulon 16:01, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Villa Aichele4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Brunnen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks like a sundial to me. I added a category and information. The light is a little bit dull as during a cloudy day, but the EXIF data says Lightsource set to sunshine. --NorbertNagel 18:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wyhlen - Georgskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough. --Mattbuck 21:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Duale Hochschule BW5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Could possibly do with being bluer, but nothing really wrong. --Mattbuck 14:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Hans-Thoma-Gymnasium3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mattbuck 14:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Churches and VIs

Hi Wlady,

You may want to have a look at Commons talk:Valued image scope.

Best wishes, --Slaunger (talk) 20:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Alte Halle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Iifar 18:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Ostansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 15:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Not that I like Wikiprojects anymore...

but Loerrach rocks... Alles liebe für Dich Wlady. Ich könnte mich echt kaputtlachen. Da schafft ein unbeschränkt gesperrter Fotograf mehr ran als manch ein "Qualitätsautor" und Admin. Meinen herzlichen Dank für deine Leistung und die besten Grüße auch an deine Frau für Geduld und Unterstützung.

Abena (talk) 16:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Danke Dir, verspätete Glückwünsche zum Nachwuchs. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:39, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Ui, ja vielen Dank auch dafür :-) Ist schon ein echtes Fossa, der Kleine ...--Abena (talk) 22:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Entsperrung

Hallo Wlady, ich hatte gestern nacht mal bei Tsor, der dich vor fast zwei Jahren gesperrt hat, angefragt, welche Optionen er sieht, die Sperre deines Hauptaccounts in de wieder aufzuheben. Die aktuelle Situation ist ... doof. Allerdings bin ich auch nicht sicher, ob du daran etwas ändern möchtest. Vielleicht gibst du dazu mal einen comment? Gruß -- Achim Raschka (talk) 10:49, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Lieber Achim,

ich kann Dir sehr gerne meinen Standpunkt dazu erläutern:

1. Tsor ist für die Entsperrung sicherlich der falsche Ansprechpartner. Er hätte sich zwar weigern können, die Sperre durchzuführen. Aber hätte er es getan, hätte traditionsgemäß ein anderer diese Sperre durchgeführt. Als ausführendes Organ, fühlte er sich in der Pflicht und hat die CU-Entscheidung nicht hinterfragt. Das ist Wikipedia-Tradition.

2. Aber wenn Dir wirklich daran gelegen ist denn Fall neu aufzurollen dann kann ich Dir gerne sagen, bei wem Du an der richtigen Adresse bist: BDK. Ihre Entscheidung war es schließlich, den CU überhaupt durchzuführen, obwohl gar keine relevante Sachlage vorlag. Weder habe ich, wie nach wie vor einige Spacken gerne behaupten, Abstimmungen mit mehreren Benutzeraccounts gefälscht (es ging um die Abstimmungen bei KEB) noch habe ich weitere Manipulationen vorgenommen. Besagter Account im Sperrverfahren war meine Frau. Daher auch die Übereinstimmung. Aber selbst wenn man sich auf den Standpunkt stellt, ich sei es selbst gewesen findet man keine Manipulationen gleich welcher Art.

Übrigens ganz interessant in diesem Zusammenhang ist, wie in der Wikipedia mit zweierlei Maß gemessen wird. Als Berlin-Jurist damals tatsächlich eindeutig dem SP-Missbrauch überführt wurde, gab er "nur" seine Adminrechte ab, eine indefinite Sperre: Fehlanzeige. Es ist also nicht einmal eindeutig geregelt, dass so eine Verstoß überhaupt mit einer derartigen Sperre geahndet wird. Aber wie gesagt: ich stehe nach wie vor dazu: es gab keinen Missbrauch durch irgendwelche Zweitaccount. Der wurde ebenso konstruiert wie sich BDK von einer Welle von Stimmungen hat einspannen lassen. Auch interessantes Detail: den damaligen CU-Antrag stellte eine der zahlreichen Diskussions- und Pöbelsocken. Diese wurde zwar gesperrt, aber der CU-Antrag wurde einfach mal ausgeführt weil man bereits ahnte, hier könnte eine Übereinstimmung herauskommen. Ob diese dann tatsächlich gerechtfertigt war und ein Missbrauch vorlag fragt hinterher keiner mehr nach; im Normalfall. Eine Mail mit dezidierten Fragen hat BDK übrigens nie beantwortet. Sie hat das in ihrer Selbstherrlichkeit ebenso wenig nötig wie sich für ihr Treiben bei CU zu rechtfertigen. Aufgrund ihrer ununterbrochenen und jahrelangen Tätigkeit bei CU genießt sie "höchstes Vertrauen" und wurde ja auch erst kürzlich wieder in diesem Amt bestätigt. Diese Person ist hochgradig untauglich für den Job und die Wikipedia tut sich mit ihr ebenso wenig einen Gefallen wie sie auch jemals bereit wäre zuzugeben, dass sie aus reinem Opportunismus mal so eben die CU-Richtlinien außer Kraft gesetzt hat, eine Abfrage nur in begründeten Missbrauchsfällen durchzuführen um einen Schaden oder dauerhafte Störungen von der Wikipedia abzuwenden.

3. Die Gemeinschaft der Wikipedia muss sich gut überlegen, welchen Figuren sie welche Ämter verleiht und viel kritischer nachprüfen, ob die jeweilige Person das Amt wirklich im vorgesehenen Sinne ausführt. Zu oft werden sehr oberflächliche Maßstäbe angesetzt ("hat er sich auch nie im Ton vergriffen", "war er immer zu allen hübsch freundlich"). Aber selten sieht man Benutzer ernsthaft fragen "hat er auch seinen Job einfach gut getan". Mit derartigen CU-Entscheidungen wie in 2. beschrieben tut sich die Wikipedia keinen Gefallen. Nutznießer sind einige wenige, die sich gegen mich verschworen haben und glaubten, mich so los werden zu können. Interessanterweise sind das zumeist Personen gewesen, die einen verschwindend geringen Teil zum Gelingen der WP beigetragen haben. Sicher wäre die Wiederinkraftsetzung des Accounts Taxiarchos228 angemessen; man würde einen Fehler wieder gut machen. Nichtsdestotrotz werde ich mich in keine Diskussionen einschalten, die das Thema betrifft. Dafür ist mir meine Zeit zu schade geworden. Es ist sehr angenehm mit mehreren Accounts zu arbeiten, manchmal als IP. Es kursieren bereits diverse Gerüchte, mit welchen Accounts ich unterwegs bin. Ich werde mich dazu nicht äußern, nicht weil ich was zu verbergen hätten sondern schlicht weil ich es nicht muss. Es ist meine Angelegenheit und wird es auch bleiben. Darüber hinaus bin ich mit Accounts unterwegs, die noch nie unter Verdacht standen. Ich kann nun auch sehr gut selbst steuern wie dicht man mir auf die Spur kommt oder auch nicht. Es hat den unschlagbaren Vorteil: ich kann in Ruhe und trotzdem in Kollaboration mit anderen Benutzern meine Artikel- und Bilderarbeit erledigen. Interessanterweise ohne irgendwelche Sperren weil meine viel zu breit gefächerten Interessen, die sich zudem auch noch weiter entwickeln nicht mehr ganz so nachvollziehbar sind. Mit entsprechender Verzögerung kriegt man dann schon mit welche Artikel auf meinem Mist beruhen. Aber bevor der Account von irgendwelchen Diskussionstrollen belagert wird, wird er in Frührente geschickt und längst hat ein anderer seine Arbeit begonnen. Die Wikipedia will das so. Es ist genau so wie Fossa das in seinem Vortrag in Lüneburg darstellte: Wikipedia ist ein Spiel.

Fazit: gerade mit der Arbeit der letzten beiden Jahre habe ich denke ich ziemlich klar gezeigt: mir liegt die Entwicklung der Wikipedia mit ihren Idealen am Herzen, ich habe Spaß am Schreiben und Fotografieren und mich weiter entwickelt. Ich werde dem Projekt treu bleiben. Aber ich werde mich nicht mit Pöblern auseinander setzen und entweder weiß Wikipedia das zu bewerten und kann adäquat darauf reagieren oder sie lässt es. Es gibt immer Wege und Mittel.

Viele Grüße und nochmal vielen Dank für deinen Einsatz. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grüttpark - Winter3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 12:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Archaeodontosaurus 06:55, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grüttpark - Winter2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice--Jebulon 16:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grüttpark - Winter1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 17:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tüllingen - Ottilienkirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality though sky is a bit noisy. 'Why no EXIF data?' --NorbertNagel 11:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC) weil der Joghurt keine Gräten hat. --Taxiarchos228 15:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herten - St. Urban - Langhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments sehr gut --Carschten 16:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and interesting. --NorbertNagel 19:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Kirchen im Landkreis Lörrach

... für anhaltende exzellente Bild- und Textarbeit, vor allem in den Bereichen Lörrach und Kanada.

Hallo Wlady,
danke für die Kuriernachricht und natürlich ncoh deutlich größeres DANKE für dieses Projekt und deine investierte Arbeit in Bild und Text. Ich denke, das sollte einen Platz in [1] finden und ich bin optimistisch, dass es auch einige Nachahmer geben wird. Ich hoffe, weiterhin von dir zu lesen - trotz bekannter Hürden.

In Anerkennung dieser Leistung habe ich dich in meinen privaten Walk of Fame aufgenommen. Gruß -- Achim Raschka (talk) 09:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Klasse, hast du es endlich geschafft :-) Daraus ließe sich doch prima ein Buch generieren? Ich habe mir grad eins über die Denkmale von Wolfsburg besorgt, das ist mein Vorhaben für 2012. In WOB weiß ich, daß ich bei dem Vorhaben alleine bin, selbst die Denkmalbehörde weiß nicht viel. --Ralf Roleček 10:49, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, das ist aber eine nette Geste. Vielen Dank. Nicht unerwähnt darf bleiben, dass meine Frau sich hierbei tapfer geschlagen hat, die meinen Kirchentrip wacker getragen und sogar unterstützt hat. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:35, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Habe es ja im Kurier schon geschrieben - hier nochmal: Hut ab! Ich weiß auch, was du hier "durchgemacht" hast, arbeite ich doch selbst an mehreren solcher Komplettprojekte. Ich gehe mal davon aus, daß es mehr als 100 Kirchen sind? Dann wäre ein Eintrag hier absolut gerechtfertigt. Marcus Cyron (talk) 14:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

122 Kirchen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Habe es mal eingetragen - und auch für die Zedler-Medaille vorgeschlagen. Ich liebe derartige Projekte einfach. Marcus Cyron (talk) 02:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow. Auch von mir herzlichen Glückwunsch! --JosFritz (talk) 00:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

+1. LG, --Holder (talk) 07:39, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Süden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 23:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Südwesten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support light and interesting angle --Archaeodontosaurus 07:01, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Yann 15:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossbergschule6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:44, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossbergschule1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments It's a bit borderline, but I'll go with it, it's interesting anyway. --Mattbuck 19:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Kreisverkehr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Bottom left corner is a bit distracting, but generally good, if dull. --Mattbuck 19:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Steinen - Vogelpark2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Lizenzänderung

Hallo Wlady, mal eine Frage, die du mir bestimmt schnell beantworten kannst. Ist es möglich nachträglich Lizenzen von seinen eigenen Bildern zu ändern, auch wenn sie schon verwendet werden. Ich finde immer mehr Fotos von mir im WWW ohne entsprechnde Namensnennung und Lizenzhinweise. Ich würde gerne alle meine Bilder unter die

Lizenz stellen. Kannst du mir kurz was darüber sagen? --Ritchyblack (talk) 11:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Ritchyblack,

Da hast Du dir ja den richtigen für diese Frage ausgesucht. Mein Rechtsanwalt sagt ganz klar: ja. Die Hobby-Juristen und Freizeit-Admins hier auf Commons sagen nein; wahrscheinlich nur damit sie auch mal was entscheiden wollen und nicht nur dösige Löschanträge abarbeiten. Ich habe diesbezüglich hier letztes Jahr ein ziemliches Aufhebens gemacht. Man änderte alle von mir auf FAL geänderten Lizenzen wieder zurück auf die ursprüngliche und droht mit Sperrung des Accounts sollte man diese Regel nicht befolgen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Erst mal danke für deine schnelle Antwort, hört sich ja "spannend" an. Ich denke ich werde schon mal alle ändern die keine Dateiverwendung haben, mal sehen was geschied. Schönes WE. --Ritchyblack (talk) 12:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gempenturm1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, nice composition. --Ralf Roletschek 08:10, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Heizhaus und Glashaus am Goetheanum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done. --Iifar 11:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grüttpark - Winter5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Needs a little crop at right IMO. But perfect light, mood and exposure.--Jebulon 16:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC) Street light on the right is bent to the left: Perspective distortion. Apart from that very nice. --NorbertNagel 17:29, 15 January 2012 (UTC) improved --Taxiarchos228 21:53, 18 January 2012 (UTC) Good quality. --NorbertNagel 22:14, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 09:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Burg Birseck2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 18:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Südwesten2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Cool. --Mattbuck 18:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Osten4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Beautiful. --Mattbuck 18:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Images

Hello Taxiarchos228! I see that not only have you nominated lots of Quality Images, but you also often comment (positive, negative, or neutrally). I have only proposed two of my pictures (1 and 2) for promotion, but have never received any comment of any sort. I would like to know what I should do to improve matters? Is it the resolution? Image size? Subject? I must admit that I do now regret submitting the first image, as I no longer think it good enough for accolades, but I would still welcome feedback. Best regards, Mr.choppers (talk) 08:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mr.choppers,

my personal opinion is that both pictures are really good and worth to be chosen as quality image. If this pictures where archived without any comment than start a new candidature. Because there are many pictures in QIC the perception is different and some pictures will be badly misremembered. So good look for next time. Regards --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:11, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Saint George church in Grenzach-Wyhlen, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

•  Oppose
  Please take a look at Commons:Valued image scope: Buildings, like other places, should be of more than local interest to justify a scope. Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope. Cathedral scopes are OK, but for other churches there should be a good reason, like being a pilgrimage place, being really famous, being architecturally exceptional... IMHO a reason for nomination should be given. --Berthold Werner (talk) 18:32, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment Are we to apply that logic to every insect, egg, mollusc shell and flower? Saffron Blaze (talk) 19:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
• No, at Commons:Valued image scope#Domain-specific scope guidelines you will find also the rules for animals, plants and so on. I quoted the part for buildings. If you think a disussion about that rule is needed, imho it should be done at Commons_talk:Valued_image_scope. --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
  • This church has encyclopaedic relevance and every object that has so can have a VI. I don't put s.th. to small-minded rules. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
• I don't know if the rules are small-minded or not, but they are the rules, and they are precise enough in this specific case. You may disagree with the rules, then please feel free to ask for a change (and a vote) in the appropriate page, fortunately here it is a wiki. If not, please let's follow the current rules.--Jebulon (talk) 15:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't discuss about your subjective opinion. This church has encyclopaedic relevance. There is nothing to say more. --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't have any opinion, I speak about rules I'm not responsible of, which are pure facts. Writing that they ar small-minded IS an opinion. this church has an encyclopedic relevance IS an opinion, and needs to be proved.--Jebulon (talk) 20:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

This so-called rules are very interpretable and therefore worthless and this is a fact and no opinion. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

The rules are not so-called, they are rules we have to follow, or to change by consensus. Please participate to the debate mentioned below.--Jebulon (talk) 13:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

•  Support - if we can have a scope for every subspecies, we can have a scope for every notable church. --Claritas (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I just ask for an explanation about the notability of this church. And I strongly disagree with the vote above. You are trying to make a point with your vote, Claritas, and it is not the way to do IMO. the rules are clear enough, please discuss for a change if needed (but I agree with your opinion)-Jebulon (talk) 13:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
• I have now started a discussion here: Commons_talk:Valued_image_scope#Scopes of churches and other religious buildings
•  Oppose As Berthold. พ.s. 22:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 20:00, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 04:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Sfu 10:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Pauluskirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Some visible artifacts on the sky, but nevertheless very good quality. --Iifar 09:15, 20 January 2012 (UTC) Tilt cw--Jebulon 16:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Speisehaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. It is a pity that there is this hugly pole in the front, but I don't think it can be avoided. --Yann 12:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Osten2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great symmetry --Kadellar 22:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Bruderholz Dinosaurier5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good technical quality, somehow nice image composition. --NorbertNagel 18:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Grüttpark - Winter3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grüttpark - Winter3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gempenturm2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --ArildV 15:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Südwesten3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Maybe to tight bottom crop, otherwise good quality and nice winter light. --ArildV 15:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Bruderholz Dinosaurier3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Yann 12:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gempenturm3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. schwieriges Motiv --Ralf Roletschek 14:59, 25 January 2012 (UTC) echt? --Taxiarchos228 21:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --FlügelRad 15:59, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Bruderholz Dinosaurier1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Tail cut off.--Jebulon 18:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC) hey, be fair, I had to fight to the death for making this picture --Taxiarchos228 20:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC) I'm not so picky. QI for me --LC-de 12:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Eremitage4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice. --Kadellar 19:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Osten6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Mattbuck 17:20, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skulptur am Goetheanum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I'm not sure abaout the colors. This pic seems to have a green cast. --LC-de 12:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC) Seems OK to me - just a frosty day. Mattbuck 17:20, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Eremitage3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 22:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Gempen Tower

Schwieriges Motiv: ich erlebe bei sowas immer wieder CA an den Kanten und weiß nicht so recht, wie ich dem begegnen soll. --Ralf Roleček 21:32, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Ich dachte immer, für CA ist in erster Linie die verwendete Linse verantwort. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Weiß ich nicht. Konnte da noch keine Gesetzmäßigkeit entdecken. --Ralf Roleček 10:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Wohl nur ein sehr gutes Festbrennweitenobjektiv wird bei sehr starken hell-dunkel Kontrasten kaum oder gar keine CA zeigen. Ich führe immer ein Beispiel auf: einmal Baumzweige gegen einen hellen bedekten Himmel knipsen. Damit kann man die Objektive gut austesten. Mit meiner Kamera und mit all meinen Objektiven sehe ich da immer CA. Eine einzige Ausnahme habe ich jedoch das Zeiss Makro-Planar T*2/100mm ZE. Ansonsten bleibt nur eines übrig: die CA muß herausgerechnet werden. Canon macht es mit DPP bei ihren eigenen Objektiven sehr gut, ohne das man noch etwas von der CA zu sehen bekommt. Ich weiß nicht ab es bei Nikon ähnliches gibt. Ich denke aber schon. Vielleicht könnt Ihr mir ja die Frage beantworten!? Grüße, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:04, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Habe keine Ahnung, ob und wo Nikon Software CA herausrechnet. Mir persönlich sind CA in meinem Bildern nie störend aufgefallen und die wurden bisher auch praktisch nie von anderen bemängelt. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:07, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Bei diesem Bild ist es ganz schlimm und ich bin hilflos, wie ich sowas beseitigen könnte. --Ralf Roleček 11:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pauluskirche (Basel), exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

•  Oppose Please add gallery. พ.s. 23:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

What gallery? There is no such criteria, your own ideas are not basis for evaluation. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:43, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Do NOT change my votes. I'll ask you only once! พ.s. 20:26, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree with Taxiarchos228. The vote of ws is unvalid IMO, because of wrongly based. Please don't vote on purpose to "make a point". Rules are rules, and if you disagree, make a proposition on the appropriate page and try to obtain consensus.--Jebulon (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

•  Support A gallery is not a requisitive. Yann (talk) 07:25, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• IMO, this vote is only a compensation against the vote of Wetenschatje, and does not strictly concern the picture. Both behaviours are destroying the VI project and I think we must stop this.--Jebulon (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Westtreppenhaus5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Second nom in QIC. I repeat: could have been a good FP...--Jebulon 15:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Osten5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Deine Gesamtdoku des Goehteanums, wäre die nicht was für eine Auszeichnung. Da fehlt nicht viel für einen Bildband. --Mbdortmund 14:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grüttpark - Winter4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality--Lmbuga 16:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Bitte um Drüberschauen

Hallo Taxiarchos,

da du dich mit diesen Dingen imho besser auskennst: Könntest du dir vielleicht einmal kurz anschauen, ob ich hier alles richtig angegeben habe? Bin mir nicht ganz sicher, da es sich dabei nicht um das Gemälde handelt (das wäre in Farbe), sondern um eine- nun eben, wie nennt man es dann? :) Dank und Gruß,----SEM (talk) 00:08, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi SEM, falsch war nichts eingetragen. Ich habe noch den Künstertag und die -kategorie ergänzt. Ansonsten ist alles prima. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Besten Dank!--SEM (talk) 13:59, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting, although it seems to be more about people at the falls than the falls themselves. Good quality anyway. --Avenue 10:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Eremitage2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Yann 12:52, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Detail7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 16:29, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wasserturm Bruderholz, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

•  Oppose Please add gallery. พ.s. 23:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

What gallery? There is no such criteria, your own ideas are not basis for evaluation. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:43, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree. A gallery is not a requirement for now. IMO this vote in unvalid because based on a wrong reason. Please do not vote on purpose to "make a point".--Jebulon (talk) 10:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Do NOT change my votes. I'll ask you only once! พ.s. 20:25, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

•  Support A galley is not a requisitive. Yann (talk) 07:25, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
  • IMO, the vote above does not concern the picture itself, but only the negative vote of ws. Both behaviours are dangerous for the project of VI, IMO. Please let's only judge the pictures according to the guidelines, and only to the guidelines. Here is not the place for changing them.--Jebulon (talk) 10:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
•  Support all criteria met. Tomer T (talk) 08:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
•  Question What makes this image more valuable than File:Wasserturm Bruderholz.jpg? cmadler (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

this candidate has a better solution. The leafy trees on the pictures of your propose hide parts of the structure of this building, re-question: what makes it better in your eyes? --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I apologize if I misunderstand, because I'm new to VI, but my guess is that the burden is on the nominator to explain why the chosen image is best, rather than on other editors to show that a specific other image is better. With that said, I looked at the relevant images in the category and asked myself, "If I were to pick an image as the best, which would I pick?" I easily narrowed it to either the nominated image or the one I linked. The nominated image contains less obstructions, but I find the lighting harsh. The other image is certainly lower resolution, but it is still adequate for VI. It's then a question of trading off the harsh lighting of this for the minor obstructions of the other. I found it to be a toss-up (though if I were picking one to illustrate an article, I'd take the other, which is more aesthetically pleasing because of the greenery), which is why I asked someone to make the case for this image over the other. cmadler (talk) 19:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

You find the light harsh, I find the light of File:Wasserturm Bruderholz.jpg sort of muddy and for sure it is overexposed (not so easy to correct) and aslope (easy to correct). And over all it has for me an inferior view of the structure. But feel free to oppose this candidate and nominate your favourite as new candidate. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

 Neutral As I've said, I see advantages to either picture. I find it to be a toss-up; if I needed to use one I'd probably choose the other photo, but that's based on my opinion of the aesthetics and not on the VI criteria (how "well" it illustrates the tower). cmadler (talk) 10:50, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 08:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Neues Wasserkraftwerk - Gesamtansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mbdortmund 04:23, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Pauluskirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mbdortmund 04:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum im Winter von Osten3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The balance of the white is a little inexact. I offer such variant (the file is updated) ;). --Aleks G 21:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)  Support --Aleks G 13:28, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Speisehaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:38, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Pauluskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The tree is rather disturbing, but good image though; and good encyclopedic value too. -- MJJR 16:57, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schopfheim - Wiesenbrücke1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Qi to me--Lmbuga 21:49, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Pauluskirche6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 21:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 14:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Hauptbahnhof3 - Fahrradparkhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 11:22, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
New hydroelectric power plant in Rheinfelden, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

•  Question Is "Neues Wasserkraftwerk Rheinfelden" the name of the plant, or merely a description? If a name, I think that should be the category/scope. If a description, I think we should find something better (surely it has a name or d, because someday a newer plant may be built there! (Likewise for "Altes Wasserkraftwerk Rheinfelden", categorized as "Old hydroelectric power plant in Rheinfelden", though that is beyond the purview of this discussion.) I do agree that this is the best in scope, I just have a concern about the way the scope and category are designated. cmadler (talk) 18:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The description "new hydroelectric power plant" was made to make clear that there was also a old (very traditional) power plant. this was broken down quite recently last year. So also the category and scope has this name. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
    • Let me try to pose my question differently. Suppose that, 75 years from now, this plant is demolished and a newer one built. How would we then refer to each of the three?
      • If you want rename it into hydroelectric power plant in Rheinfelden --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please create gallery and link to it in the scope. พ.พ.s. 10:42, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
  • no consens for your priviat opinion, but I already see that you are blocked for three days for your aggressive and provocative activities --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:20, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Per the reason of nomination--Jebulon (talk) 22:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 20:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schopfheim - Wiesenbrücke3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Hauptbahnhof4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 13:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Evangelisches Gemeindehaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I feel something is not perfect, but cannot figure out. So let it be QI. Oh, and what about geocode?--PereslavlFoto 20:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Pauluskirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sky maybe a little bit noisy, but apart from that, nothing wrong, good QI IMO.--Jebulon 14:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossbergschule3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 11:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Restaurant (ehemaliges Turmcafe).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 21:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Granitskulptur Triade2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 21:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Hauptbahnhof2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--Jebulon 19:01, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Granitskulptur Triade1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 22:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kulm - Skiflugschanze1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments sieht an zwei kalibrierten Schirmen völlig verschieden aus. Schwieriges Licht, sparsame Farben - schön! --Ralf Roletschek 10:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Taxiarchos228/HDR

Hallo. Wäre das vielleicht was für eine Präsentation am Fotoworkshop in Nürnberg? --Leyo 13:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Habe ich schon einige male gehalten, aber wenn es allgemein gewünscht wird, mache ich es. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, das wusste ich nicht. Wie viele andere interessiert wären, kann ich nicht sagen. Ev. haben etliche der Teilnehmer deine Präsentation bei früheren Fotoworkshops gesehen? Je nachdem könnte man das Thema hier vorschlagen und schauen, ob es auch diesmal auf Interesse stösst. --Leyo 21:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schöne stürzende Linien --Ralf Roletschek 20:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossberghalle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Skiflugschanze Kulm.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 17:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hallstatt - Gesamtansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Aleks G 22:42, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Speisehaus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 11:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Eiffelturm

Habe die von Dir gewünschten Bilder hochgeladen. Grüße--Muesse (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Danke Dir. Das ein oder andere wird garantiert eine tolle Bereicherung für den angestrebten neuen Artikel sein. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo wladyslaw

I am for thé moment in Wien for short holidays, with hard difficulties for connecting with Internet. When I'll back in Paris, I'll try to anwer your question. Funny: I thought of you when flying over Lörrach between Paris and Wien !--Jebulon (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Fine, have nice days in Vienna. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Here is the answer and the first option was good : 41 tv, and 32 radios. ("TDF" means "Télédiffusion de France", and is the national official broadcasting (technically speaking) institution). I hope it will help you. Cheers (Vienna was nice and interesting, thanks).--Jebulon (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

It is partially helpful. Sadly the programs are only listed by their logo and not by their name. The list on the bottom of the 1st page is only facing the TV programs, but where are the radio programs? It would be also very helpful to know at least all the frequencies and effective radiated power given by kW. The flayer is nice but there are not so much technical details for the programs itself. I am sure that this information had to be public. Sadly my french is so bad that I am not able to search myself. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• http://www.tdf.fr/eiffeltnt/index.html - general page
• http://www.radioactu.com/actualites-radio/64297/csa-publication-du-plan-de-frequences-en-ile-de-france/
• http://www.radiomap.eu/fr/parisIm

ok I understand. Your french is bad, my english and german too, and I'm not a specialist (in fact, I don't know anything about), but I'll try to continue to search and give you a more professional answer asap. Cheers.--Jebulon (talk) 12:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I found this list [2]. Do you know which of theme are radio and wich are TV progarmms? --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm - Aufzug6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice! --NorbertNagel 22:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok.--ArildV 09:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hinweisschilder am Goetheanum2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I like it, but it's got some problematic ISO grain. Why ISO400 at 1/800th? Mattbuck 23:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC) I made this shot at 08:26, 15. Jan. 2012 before sunrise so the light was few, therefore ISO 400, the grain should be able to reduce --Taxiarchos228 12:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC) The lighting was hardly problematic given you managed exposure of 1/800th. At ISO100 that's still 1/200th. I was taking photos in the sunshine yesterday and wasn't getting that short an exposure. Anyway, fix the grain and I'll promote. Mattbuck 13:54, 2 March 2012 (UTC) The tilt should also be corrected for me--Moroder 17:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC) both fixed --Taxiarchos228 20:01, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  CommentI like the shot and I also think distortion isn't so important, but notice this: for this shot you should have stood in line with the pillar to obtain a symmetric view, IMHO it'd be more interesting. I don't know if it was possible, but I would include the whole second floor. --Kadellar 16:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC) Well I like it.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thal - Sankt Jakob1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 10:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick auf Thal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 10:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thal - Sankt Jakob2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mbdortmund 03:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salzburg - Panorama (nachts)2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 14:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thal - Sankt Jakob3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  CommentIs there a way to reduce the noise? --Frank Schulenburg 15:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC) denoised now --Taxiarchos228 15:47, 1 March 2012 (UTC) Great shot. --Frank Schulenburg 16:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Hauptfriedhof7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salzburg - Panorama (nachts).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Beautiful. --Saffron Blaze 17:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC) Support very nice --Moonik 17:52, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Hallstatt.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Very nice scope. I see about 5 good competitors here divided in two groups depending on the view point. Both viewpoints shows the two churches. Here an example of the other viewpoint. This view embrace shorter front line of the village but gives additional information and impression. Cheers. ;) --MrPanyGoff 14:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC) Do you mind if I open a MVR?--MrPanyGoff 16:49, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment A set here could be interesting --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment Nobody gives additional opinion but this beautiful place should has its photo in the VI project so let us see the MVR.--MrPanyGoff 11:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Well, finally I decided to support this one though I would prefer a season when the trees are green.--MrPanyGoff 19:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 23:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 09:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 09:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - S-Bahn-Haltestelle Schwarzwaldstraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments You are copying Mattbuck! --NorbertNagel 18:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sun's reflection makes whitewashed wall just a bit overexposed, but it's nevertheless QI to me. --Iifar 19:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Renault Estafette1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 19:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Röttelnweiler - Hinweisschild Röttler Kirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Gut--Gauravjuvekar 14:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thal - Ruine Unterthal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments hübsche Mülltonnen... --Carschten 16:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Röttelnweiler1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 18:20, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Röttelnweiler5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 05:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Röttelnweiler4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments sehr gut --Carschten 19:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Renault Estafette2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Shouldn't the license plate be blurred? (same with front view below) --Till.niermann 21:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC) there is no need to do so, the image was made in public space --Taxiarchos228 21:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Brunnen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments aber links sollte noch beschnitten werden. Schärfe enttäuscht ein wenig, aber aus meiner Sicht dennoch ein QI. --Carschten 20:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Carschten 20:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kulm - Skiflugschanze4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I'd prefer it sharper, but OK. --Mattbuck 17:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Domkirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Frage

File:Industry park Höchst - waste-to-energy plant - Industriepark Höchst - Müllverbrennungsanlage - 04.jpg
Gerne kannst Du dich an der HDR-Erstellung versuchen. Wenn es besser wird, wüsste ich aber gerne, wie Du es gemacht hast :-). Ich habe 10-11 nef-Dateien mit jeweils ca. 17MB, die ich Dir zusenden kann (Lichtwert-Unterschied bei den überbelichteten Aufnahmen 2, bei den unterbelichteten 1). Ich kann die Dateien bei Bedarf auch vorher umwandeln (DNG, TIFF). Mein HDR ist mit Photoshop CS5 entstanden. Mit Picturenaut war das Ergebnis schlechter. Auf welchem Weg möchtest Du die Dateien haben ? -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Wiesenbrücke Graffiti3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality & very nice. --NorbertNagel 17:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Wiesenbrücke Graffiti2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and interesting picture -- George Chernilevsky 19:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK -- George Chernilevsky 19:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK -- George Chernilevsky 19:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 21:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus Haagen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Kiran Gopi 06:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Wiesenbrücke.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Urban wildlife - squirrel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - King's Landing Condominium.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Domkirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Truck with trailer in Toronto.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Dorfstraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Füssen - Klosterkirche St. Mang30.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Linderhof1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum2a small.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 11:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Wiesenbrücke Graffiti1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Schule2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 15:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Schule1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 23:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Lörrach - Tumringen - Schule2.jpg

IMHO this image would look better in vertical style, with the full door and without left window. Maybe you may add such a photo? --PereslavlFoto (talk) 20:42, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 09:47, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm - Büste Gustave Eiffels2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:40, 21 March 2012 (UTC)Only a comment: maybe this picture lacks a bit of contrast (too soft colors ?), but not enough to decline.--Jebulon 09:18, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Festhalle1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 21:41, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Metzgerei.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 21:41, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Astrid-Lindgren-Schule2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good pano. - A.Savin 21:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Reiss Mühle1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 08:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Festhalle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Iifar 20:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Quality images of Landkreis Reutlingen

Hallo Taxiarchos, ich weiß nicht was in der o.g. Kategorie passiert ist, aber das sind bis auf eines alles Bilder aus dem Landkreis Ludwigsburg. Vielleicht magst du es ja korrigieren? Viele Grüße --Pilettes (talk) 08:47, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Pilettes, aufgrund der Menge an Qualitätsbildern in Baden-Württemberg habe ich zur feineren Kategorisiereung entsprechende Landkreis-Kategorien angelegt. Dabei sind diese Bilder von mir wohl falsch einsortiert worden. Ist nun korrigiert. Danke für den Hinweis und Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:09, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, super :-) --Pilettes (talk) 06:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Kriterien Qualitätsbilder

Hallo Wladyslaw!

Um nicht den Rahmen der Bewertungsseite zusprengen, möchte ich die Diskussion über die fogenden Bilder gerne hier fortführen. Da unsere Meinungen scheinbar erhelich auseinandergehen möchte ich Dir kurz erklären, warum ich diese nicht für QI-geeignet halte:

• 
• 

Mein ehemaliger Photo-Prof hat für Aufnahmen wie diese das Wort "Versicherungsphotographie" geprägt: Sie zeigen den Gegenstand des Interesses, mehr aber auch nicht. Damit konnte man schon im ersten Semester Photographie keinen Blumentopf mehr gewinnen ;)

Es ist mir bewusst, dass auch solche Bilder ihre Daseinsbereichtigung in der Wikipedia-Welt haben. Mache Gegenstände lassen sich eben nicht anders photographieren, manchmal steht eben alles mögliche im Weg, das Licht ist bescheiden und man hat keine Zeit auf besseres zu warten. Da macht auch der beste Photograph mal ein mäßiges Bild (eines, dass eben kein Qualitätsbild ist).

Technische Qualität ist eben nicht gleichbedeutend mit photographischer! Ein sauberes, scharfes und hochauflösendes Photo ist nicht automatisch ein gutes Photo (sowas kann irgendwann jeder Roboter erfüllen )! Ein gutes Bild zeichnet sich zudem durch seine ästhetische Qualität aus! Da Du ja auch schon viele tolle Bilder hier eingestellt hast, ist Dir dieser Unterschied sicher bewusst?!

Umgekehrt bedeutet das aber, dass kompositorische und ästhetische Mängel nicht erst bei den hervoragenden Bildern, sondern auch bei den Qualitätsbildern ein Ausschlusskriterium sind. Nicht umsonst steht in Kriterien für Qualitätsbilder unter »Bildaufbau und Beleuchtung« »Die Anordnung des Hauptgegenstandes sollte zum Inhalt des Bildes beitragen. Der Vordergrund und Hintergrund des Bildes sollte nicht ablenken.« und auch die Images guidelines sind da relativ eindeutig!

Stellst Du eigentlich (fast) jedes Bild, das Du hochlädst automatisch als Kandidat bei den Qualitätsbildern ein? In der letzten Woche zähle ich dort jedenfalls 16 Neueinträge von Dir (darunter etliche bei denen ich selbst niemals auf diese Idee gekommen wäre). Falls ja würde ich Dich bitten dieses Vorgehen zu überdenken! QI ist eine Auszeichnung und es widerspricht schlich tdem Sinn einer Auszeichnung, wenn sie für alles vergeben würde, was die Mindestanforderungen erfüllt. Die Kandiatenlisten mit bestenfalls durchschnittlichen Bildern zu fluten, verwässert IMHO die Qualitätskriterien und schadet so letztlich der Qualität des gesamten Projekts --Martin Kraft (talk) 17:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Du scheinst Commons und QI falsch zu interpretieren. Wir machen hier nicht primär Kunst sondern Dokumetationsfotografie. --Ralf Roleček 19:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Martin, deine Ausführungen passen eher zu den Exzellenten Bildern auf Commons. Die Anforderungen dort unterscheiden sich nämlich von denen bei Qualitätsbildern in erster Linie dadurch, dass es i.d.R. nicht ausreicht, dass das Bild von solider technischer Qualität ist, sondern dass es auch gewissen ästhetischen Ansprüchen genügen soll (was manchmal freilich durch einen hohen enzyklopädischen Wert, Einzigartigkeit / Nicht-Wiederholbarkeit des Motivs u.ä., ganz oder teilweise ausgeglichen werden kann). Was meinst du sonst, warum es sich unter den neuen FP's so viele Makrobilder von Schmetterlingen, Insekten, Blumen etc. befinden, eher selten jedoch von Alltagsmotiven oder auch von Personen? Außerdem ack Ralf. - A.Savin 20:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Ich spreche hier nicht über Kunst (für die gelten nämlich wieder ganz andere Regeln: nämlich keine ;)) sondern über den Grundregeln der Bildgestaltung, die jeder Gebrauchs- und Pressephotograph in seiner Ausbildung lernt und die im übrigen auch in den Image guidelines und in den Kriterien für Qualitätsbilder aufgeführt sind. Oder wie sonst soll man den folgenden Abschnitt interpretieren?

»Die Anordnung des Hauptgegenstandes sollte zum Inhalt des Bildes beitragen. Der Vordergrund und Hintergrund des Bildes sollte nicht ablenken.«

@A.Savin & Ralf Rolecek Seid ihr tatsächlich der Meinung, dass die oben aufgeführten Bilder Qualitätsbilder sind? --Martin Kraft (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Ja. --Ralf Roleček 20:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Dann versteh ich Deine Vorstellung von BildQualität nicht. Bei der Bewertung der QI-Kandidaten haben andere Gott sei Dank einen etwas höheren Anspruch. Fragt sich nur wie lange der durchzuhalten ist, wenn diese Liste permanent mit Unmengen solcher Bilder geflutet wird. --Martin Kraft (talk) 21:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Die Antworten auf Deine Fragen wurden bereits von Ralf und A.Savin gegeben. Deine Umdeutung der Kriterien von QI zeugt lediglich davon, dass Du das Konzept, was dahinter steht, nicht verstanden hast. Dafür hast Du Bilder kandidieren lassen, die im Gegenzug tatsächlich den Anforderungen der QIC nicht gewachsen sind. In diesem Fall würde ich mich einfach nochmal mit den Regeln vertraut machen. Mehr gibt es hier nicht zu sagen. Im übrigen werde ich das Gefühl nicht los, dass Du deine wenigen Kommentare, die du erst in den letzten Tagen bei QIC begonnen hast, auffällig auf Bilder von mir konzentrierst. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Es fällt mir schwer zu erkennen, wo ich hier etwas umdeuten soll? Ich halte mich mit meiner Bewertung lediglich an die schriftlich niedergelegten Kriterien (und habe dabei einmal ein formales Kriterium übersehen). Bisher hat mir jedoch niemand erklären können, wie sich die beiden Bilder und Eure Argumente mit diesem Qualitäts-Kriterium vertragen:»Die Anordnung des Hauptgegenstandes sollte zum Inhalt des Bildes beitragen. Der Vordergrund und Hintergrund des Bildes sollte nicht ablenken.«'

Ja, ich bin hier erst seit kurzem aktiv. Dass ich (im übrigen genau zweimal) Bilder von Dir negativ bewertet habe, war reiner Zufall, nur den Bilder selbst geschuldet und ist mir ehrlichgesagt erst aufgefallen, als Du beide Male dasselbe, die oben genannten Kriterien leugnende Gegenargument vorgebracht hast.

Und sei mal ehrlich: Denkst Du wirklich, dass es im Sinne der Auszeichnung »Qualitätsbild« ist, wenn dort irgendwer automatisch alle (oder den Großteil) seine(r) neu eingestellen Bilder kandidieren lässt? --Martin Kraft (talk) 22:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Lieber Martin. Vielleicht solltest Du erst ein wenig Erfahrung sammeln bevor Du hier den großen Maxe heraushängen lässt. Leider kommt Deine Anfrage bei mir in einer Mischung aus vorwitzig-unverschämter Unterstellung (Die Kandiatenlisten mit bestenfalls durchschnittlichen Bildern zu fluten, verwässert IMHO die Qualitätskriterien und schadet so letztlich der Qualität des gesamten Projekts.), moralisierendem Appell mit entrüsteter Fassungslosigkeit (Stellst Du eigentlich (fast) jedes Bild, das Du hochlädst automatisch als Kandidat bei den Qualitätsbildern ein?) und fadenscheiniger Schmeichelei (Da Du ja auch schon viele tolle Bilder hier eingestellt hast ...) an. Insofern ist meine Lust ziemlich gering, mit Dir überhaupt zu kommunizieren. Bitte akzeptiere, dass wir hier eine grundsätzlich unterschiedliche Auffassung vertreten. In beiden Fällen lenkt mich der Hintergrund vom Hauptmotiv des Bildes nicht ab. Das ist und bleibt auch eine subjektive Auffassung und es ist nicht wirklich nötig den Untergang des Abendlandes zu predigen (schadet so letztlich der Qualität des gesamten Projekts). Im Gegenzug kann ich nämlich Deine Beurteilungen ebenfalls nicht teilen und muss auch damit leben, dass Du Maßstäbe, die Du bei mir ansetzt bei anderen Bildern offenbar nicht verfolgst. Es gehört zum gegenseitigen Respekt, solche sagen wir mal Merkwürdigkeiten hinzunehmen. Bitte respektiere ebenfalls, dass ich keinen weiteren Dialog mit Dir führen möchte, weil die Sinnlosigkeit leider durch deine mir äußerst unangenehme Art vorhersehbar ist. Und ja: ich verfolge tatsächlich das Ziel, dass ein möglichst großer Prozentsatz meiner Bilder "Qualitätsbilder" sind. Etwas verwerfliches kann ich daran aber nicht erkennen. So wenig wie zwar Masse automatisch Klasse bedeutet, so wenig gibt gilt die Umkehrung, dass viel Masse zwangsläufig miese Klasse ist. --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Danke, das mit der "äußerst ungenehmen Art" gebe ich gerne zurück. Eigentlich wollte ich Dich nur freundlich darauf hinweisen, warum ich (und andere) der Meinung sind, dass solche Bilder aus genannten Gründen keine Qualitätsbilder sind, und sie in ihrer Masse dieser Auszeichnung schaden. Statt auf diese Argumente einzugehen, hast Du es geschafft auf keine einzige meiner (nicht rethorisch gemeinten) Fragen zu anworten und versuchst stattdessen mich vom hohen Ross herab als Frischling zu diskreditieren.

Nun ja, ich hätte gewarnt sein können, dass es nicht sonderlich fruchtbar ist, mit Dir zu diskutieren.

Ich werde deshalb darauf verzichten, Dir jetzt zu erklären, dass dieses Verhalten nicht wirklich souverän wirkt und es ein Fehler ist, neuen Nutzern Inkompetenz zu unterstellen, und stattdessen in Zukunft einen Bogen um weitere Diskussionen mit Dir machen.

Gut finde ich Dein QI-Gespamme trotzdem nicht --Martin Kraft (talk)

Ich glaube wirklich nicht, dass jemand der hier pampig aufschlägt, in Ermangelung an sachlichen Argumenten ins persönliche driftet, dazu noch Regeln falsch versteht wie Dir mittlerweile drei Personen mitteilen (Dschwen ist übrigens einer der Initiatoren der QI) die richtige Person ist, mir einen Mangel an Souveränität zu unterstellen und mir irgendetwas erklären sollte. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:09, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Martin, wenn Du denkst, dass QI primaer eine "Auszeichnung" ist, dann bist du leide schief gewickelt. Dein Kommentar "und es widerspricht schlicht dem Sinn einer Auszeichnung, wenn sie für alles vergeben würde, was die Mindestanforderungen erfüllt" laesst mir die Fussnaegel hochrollen. Es ist genau das Ziel von QIC alles mit dem Bapperl zu versehen, was die Mindestanforderungen erfüllt! QI soll eben keine Trophaehe sein mit der man seinen digitalen Penis verlaengern kan, sondern ein Service fuer die Nutzer. Wir versuchen eine moeglichst Umfangreiche Untermenge der Commonsbilder zu klassifizieren, und einen moeglichst grossen Pool an Bildern, die den Mindestanforderungen entsprechen zusammenzustellen. Die Mentalitaet QI als Pokal zu betrachten fuehrt genau zu diesen laechelichen neidbeladenen Diskussionen und vergiftet die Arbeitsatmosphaere. Bitte lass das!!! --Dschwen (talk) 22:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Wenn QI nichts mehr mit photographischer 'Qualität' zu tun hat, kann man sich diese 'Auszeichnung' (oder wie auch immer Du das nennen willst) auch schenken?!

Worauf bitte soll ich eigentlich neidisch sein? Auf die beiden Bilder sicher nicht und bei QI werden sie z.Z. auch mehrheitlich abgelehnt...

Ich hatte diese Diskussion hier nur eröffnet, um Taxiarchos228 freundlich darauf hinzuweisen, dass es IMHO nicht sinnvoll ist solche Bilder als QI-Kandidaten einzustellen und dann bis auf die Zähne zu verteidigen. Und bis jetzt hat mir hier niemand erklären können, ob und warum entweder das schon mehrfach zitierte Kriterium falsch ist, oder aber die Bilder diesem Kriterium entsprechen?!

Das war jetzt aber wirklich mein letzter Beitrag zum Thema ;) --Martin Kraft (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Gut, denn solche rhetorischen Winkelzuege wie Wenn QI nichts mehr mit photographischer 'Qualität' zu tun hat, kann man sich diese 'Auszeichnung' (oder wie auch immer Du das nennen willst) auch schenken?! sind einfach nur ermuedend, unproduktiv und ueberfluessig. Qualitaet ist definiert als den Mindestanforderungen entsprechend. Was ist denn daran so schwer zu verstehen?! --Dschwen (talk) 23:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Germanuskirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 08:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - St. Nikolaus4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 08:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, interesting look -- George Chernilevsky 19:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Scheurerbrunnen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 21:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

FPC and AN/U

I would just like to make it clear to you here, it is not acceptable to claim people are revenge-voting against you simply because they had some disagreement with you some months back. I do not believe this is the first time this has been brought up, so please, stop it, stop it now. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:52, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Please look well! I never do this. In those cases I expressed the assumption of a revenge-voting the disagreement was either in the same day or just a few days back. Your unilateral belittlement just shows that you are overstrained to judge in this case. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, I've just darkened the facade a bit - A.Savin 19:27, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weiblicher Akt2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Same model as Ralf's? Saffron Blaze 22:57, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Good and sharp, even cellulitis is visible.--Jebulon 23:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Sorry, your comment is to me unfortunate: I think that you don't know what is cellulitis--Lmbuga 21:50, 22 March 2012 (UTC) Uououo, I think we are talking about the inner left thigh which actually does not look very glamorous but it might be a way between artifact and a (maybe?) not to smooth skin --Moroder 22:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC) Cellulite is the term he was looking for as it is irregular fatty deposits usually on the back of the legs. Cellulitis is a medical condition typically caused by a bacterial skin infection. Two different things. That said the texture of her skin on the back of the leg does look odd. Saffron Blaze 08:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)Yes, Saffron Blaze is right. Sorry for poor english. But you understood what I meant.--Jebulon 15:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

ARD Karte

Hallo Taxiarchos228, ich habe gesehen, dass du eine Komromissversion ARD Karte hochgeladen hast. Ich habe das revertiert, da wir beschlossen haben, unsere Kompromissversionen auf folgender Seite: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:ARD_Karte.svg vorzustellen und danach abzustimmen, welche am besten ist und welche dann auch verwendet wird. Mach das bitte, da mir deine Version sehr gefällt. Trotzdem vielen Dank für deine Mitarbeit. Liebe Grüße,--Ben774 (talk) 16:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Lörracher Straße2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 11:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Rosswangweg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments No Idea where to use it, strange licence; anyway it has a good quality. --Superbass 18:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Wohnblock2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --ArildV 12:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Sfu 11:55, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Blick auf Brombach und Hauingen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 12:35, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Brunnen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The car is maybe a bit disturbing, but not enough to decline this good description of the main subject IMO.--Jebulon 15:32, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedhofskapelle Brombach1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 10:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Wohnblock1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 10:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Bahnübergang.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:27, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herten - St. Josef - Marienstatue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me, but it might be a little bit tilted clockwise (not sure). --Kadellar 11:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Bühl2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 14:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - ZOB1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK -- George Chernilevsky 05:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Tumringen - Friedhof.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 15:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graugans3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me, but the tail has more detail than the eye--Lmbuga 10:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Selbymay 22:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 06:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 06:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 3 days

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 3 days for the following reason: Continuing to impugn people's motives at FPC/QIC after warnings. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

-mattbuck (Talk) 22:03, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nürnberg - Marientor Zwinger.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 08:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graugans1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, but there are three dark spots (not spots of lens) in the area of the head that, IMO, are disturbing--Lmbuga 10:48, 2 April 2012 (UTC) Spots mentioned and the one above the head need to go to be QI. --Saffron Blaze 17:48, 2 April 2012 (UTC) the spots are particle below the water surface, but I accept that they are disturbing and so I have retouched them --Taxiarchos228 18:36, 2 April 2012 (UTC)  Comment Discussion not required now. Saffron Blaze 20:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nürnberg - Dutzendteich1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Only the bulding could have more contrast. --NorbertNagel 18:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Vassil 19:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Schwörstadt - Katholische Kirche5.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schwörstadt - Katholische Kirche5.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Lorenz, Nuremberg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment This is in top 3 (exterior) photographs for sure ;) --MrPanyGoff 06:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

•  Support I'm not entirely satisfied with this one -- significant portions of it are slightly out of focus -- but it's adequate and the best we have. The out of focus portions are toward the top of the building, but it's only apparent when viewed at or near 100%, which for an image of this resolution will happen infrequently. The next-best alternative is File:Nürnberg St. Lorenz Türme Totale.jpg, but that is much lower resolution, has a slightly distracting shadow at the bottom-left corner of the building, and is too-closely cropped. cmadler (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 12:42, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Teneriffa Gesteinsschichten.JPG

This depicted structure is known as "La Tarta" for it remembers to a sliced cake. The picture shows only a small part of the whole "Tarta", another view of the same place which shows more layers is here [3]. I added your picture to the category "La Tarta de Tenerife". Greetings --Llez (talk) 21:21, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Teneriffa Gesteinsschichten.JPG, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Teneriffa Gesteinsschichten.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Ich finde es gut, dass du weiterhin Artikel einstellst, obwohl man dich gesperrt hat. -- Elendsredder (talk) 17:19, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schloss Beuggen - Torhaus6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 15:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schloss Beuggen - Torhaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 15:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments hübsch --Carschten 21:57, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Stadtbibliothek3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments sehr schönes Fotowetter, technisch perfekt. --Carschten 12:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Friedensbrücke1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 12:40, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Friedensbrücke6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments slightly noisy, but nice detail view, good quality. --Carschten 12:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Astrid-Lindgren-Schule3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments gut --Carschten 12:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Feuerwehr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 13:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Unclean sky, one stitching error. See the notes. --Iifar 16:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC) fixed them all --Taxiarchos228 09:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC). Good to go now. --Iifar 14:20, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Tumringen - Wiesenbrücke Graffiti4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok, das ist was anderes! QI for me. --Ralf Roletschek 19:32, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:52, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Zur Kenntnis

Ich Gratuliere zum Titelbild im Haushaltsplan des Landkreis Lörrach 2012, zufällig gerade gesehen, ansonsten scheinst du auch ein wirklicher Qualitätsfotograf. Zum Eigentlichen: Das Wappen Lörrach würde ich jedoch nach den heraldischen Geflogenheiten anpassen, ein Schild ohne Rahmen gibt es nicht, die Tingierung sollte eigentlich auch einheitlich sein, wenn möglich nach Vorgaben des Bundeslandes. -- πϵρήλιο ℗ 21:24, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Perhelion,

darauf hatte mich Rauenstein bereits hingewiesen. Ich wollte das nachprüfen und habe dazu die offizielle Stadtchronik aus dem Jahr 1983 hervorgekramt. Dort wird das Wappen sowohl in der bildlichen wie auch textlichen Beschreibung ohne Rahmen angezeigt bzw. beschrieben. Nun kann das durchaus falsch sein, da es kein amtliches Dokument ist obwohl von der Stadt Lörrach selbst herausgegeben, aber das muss nichts heißen. Ich bin heraldisch nicht sonderlich bewandert und wenn es falsch ist darfst Du es gerne korrigieren. Wenn Du mir bestätigen kannst, dass der Rahmen da wirklich hingehört und es selbst nicht machen willst, dann kann ich mir auch gerne die Mühe machen, wird dann aber ein paar Tage dauern weil ich derzeit andere Dinge in höherer Priorität habe. Was die Tingierung angeht gehe ich davon aus, dass die so korrekt ist. Viele Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Taxiarchos, ich habe mich nochmal genauer Fachkundig gemacht, vieler Orts werden die Wappen zu Logos umfunktioniert was nicht im eigentlichen Sinne der Hoheitszeichen ist. Ich habe mir von einem Heraldiker konkret bestätigen lassen, dass das Wappen sogar in zweierlei Hinsicht nicht heraldischen Gepflogenheiten entspricht. Eine korrigierte Version ist bereits über die alternative SVG hochgeladen. Als konkrete Fachliteratur empfiehlt er: "Walter Leonhard: Das große Buch der Wappenkunst, Weltbild-Verlag, 2003" auf das ich mich auch beziehe. Viele Grüße -- πϵρήλιο ℗ 17:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Nein das ist Absicht, wie gesagt ist dies die zweite Geflogenheit, eine heraldische de:Gemeine Figur muss immer raumausfüllend sein, dass kannst du in jedem guten Heradlikbuch nachlesen (wie gesagt hat mich auch konkret ein Heraldiker auf diesen Fall hingwiesen, sogar etwas drastischer). Immer häufiger verändern die Orte ihre Wappen entweder zum Logo oder zu einem unheraldischen Bürgerwappen, wohl meist aus Unwissenheit oder absichtlicher Ignorierung der Heraldik. S.a. altes Wappen -- πϵρήλιο ℗ 21:19, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Klingt für mich etwas abwegig. Ich weiß nicht, ob das hier: Harald Huber: Wappenbuch Landkreis Lörrach, Südkurier GmbH Konstanz, 1984, ISBN 3-87799-046-0. als "gutes Heraldikbuch" durchgeht aber auch dort finde ich die Behauptungen nicht gestützt und ich finde es auch merkwürdig, dass das angeblich korrekte Wappen auf keiner offiziellen Publikation der Stadt Lörrach bisher zu Gesicht bekam. Sollte es denn stimmen, was Du sagst hätte ich gerne eine entsprechende Quelle hierfür explizit angegeben und dann sollte es auch im Artikel zur Stadt vermerkt werden. Denn ein Logo hat bereits die Stadt Lörrach, nämlich dieses hier Lörrach Logo.svg. Meine persönliche Vermutung ist, dass deine Version eine uralt Version des Wappens ist, die im Laufe der Zeit angepasst wurde. Sollte Deine Antwort nichts erhellendes bringen werde ich die Stadt mal selber anschreiben. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 09:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dokumentationszentrum Reichsparteitagsgelände1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:29, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stettener Schlösschen (exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. Note that scope links to a non-existent page on de-wp, perhaps better to link to our Category:Stettener Schlösschen? cmadler (talk) 17:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 19:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Christuskirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 08:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Holzhaufen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Holzhaufen - das heißt gestapeltes Meterholz ;) --Ralf Roletschek 13:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schloss Beuggen - Torhaus4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 14:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nürnberg - IHK.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 16:23, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Füssen - Klosterkirche St. Mang31.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice picture but some lighting and perspective correction would help a lot--Moroder 21:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC) Maybe this image could be slightly improved, but this version meets QIC criteria withaout any problems. --Smial 13:49, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nürnberg - Dutzendteich2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:01, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Wiesenbrücke.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Astrid-Lindgren-Schule4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galleria Mendini.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Rathausgasse2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Wasserwerk1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 19:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Villa Fehr1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Storchenturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.... though i believe the panel at the lower right should be either cropped away or totally included. --Cayambe 07:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark - Skulptur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good DOF --Carschten 18:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nürnberg - Haupttribüne des Zeppelinfeldes2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK with me. --Iifar 18:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Yann 14:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 18:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schlosskirche Beuggen6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Yann 14:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schloss Beuggen - Pfarrhaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Salzburg - Panorama (nachts) - CN.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Salzburg - Panorama (nachts).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:13, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 09:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)...Already nominated yesterday !!!!!!--Jebulon 10:19, 1 May 2012 (UTC) one retired --Taxiarchos228 10:13, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 09:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Blick auf den Ort.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Vassil 11:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark - Stromleitungsmast.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 09:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Bürgerzentrum2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 11:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Evangelische Kirche10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good -- George Chernilevsky 20:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 18:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Villa Fehr3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Hotel-Bijou-Hochhaus4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 17:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 19:25, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Olympiaturm

Hallo Wladyslaw, in der Tat, ich war letzten Samstag auf dem Turm. Ich habe etwa 20-25 Bilder davon, die ich in den nächsten Tagen hochladen werde. Dabei habe ich Bild von den Turmkörben und viele vom Ganzen. Sobald ich die Bilder hochgeladen habe, sage ich dir Bescheid. Von der Plattform habe ich leider keine Bilder gemacht, es war zu befüllt mit Besuchern. Grüße, Poco a poco (talk) 19:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Siehe File:Olympiaturm, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 21.JPG Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Delisting FP

Hi. I'm not sure you noticed that they are going to delist one of your FP pictures (Neuschwanstein castle). Maybe you could argue or discuss. Just an info.--Jebulon (talk) 20:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi.

[[4]]--Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Hotel-Bijou-Hochhaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good qualit.--ArildV 16:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)y

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark - Weidenpalast2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 05:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresshalle Nürnberg9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 18:24, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttpark - Labyrinth.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 18:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Wasserturm Friedlingen3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 09:07, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Wasserturm Friedlingen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Evangelische Kirche9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 20:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Bettingen - Fernsehturm St. Chrischona4.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bettingen - Fernsehturm St. Chrischona4.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Wasserturm Friedlingen4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:04, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Friedensbrücke7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:04, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for QI. Could be sharper, apart from that, great photo. --NorbertNagel 20:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC) Please, can you remove the dust spot (see note)?--Lmbuga 23:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Gresgen

Nochmals danke für die Bilder! Witzig, dass du gerade das Ortsschild fotografiert hast; über viele Jahre war (zumindest an einem Ortseingang) ein altes, abgewetztes Ding, auf dem man höchstens noch "G esg n" o.ä. lesen konnte, das neue gibt's m.W. noch nicht so lange. Angeblich wollte man kein neues Ortsschild, da auf dem alten, schon vor der Eingemeindung errichteten, noch "Gresgen- Landkreis Lörrach" stand, während auf dem neuen ja auch "Stadt Zell" steht... ;) Viele Grüße!--SEM (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Hallo SEM,

freut mich, dass ich dem Artikel damit etwas helfen konnte. Man darf nicht unterschätzen wie wichtig eine gute Bebilderung für eine Kandidatur ist. Es braucht nicht immer exzellente Bilder aber halbwegs ordentliche Bilder sollten es schon sein. Das mit dem Ortsschild mache ich eigentlich immer so, da man das Bild im Abschnitt Geschichte einbringen kann, da es manchmal erfahrungsgemäß schwierig ist, historisches Bildmaterial zu finden, was hier ja auch der Fall war. Übrigens sind solche Schilder gar nicht so einfach gut aufzunehmen weil sie durch die reflektierende Oberfläche tendenziell immer etwas überbelichtet erscheinen. Aber inzwischen habe ich den Dreh mit den Schildern raus :-) Grüße zurück --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Excellent meadow, good photo. --Florstein 07:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Bürgerzentrum1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 18:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Ortsschild.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zell-Atzenbach - Mariä Himmelfahrt14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 20:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenzach - St. Leodegar8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good photo. --Florstein 17:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Panorama2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{o}} I've seen five dust spots. Halo of luminosity on the sky--Lmbuga 22:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC) the hardly to see dustspot I have removed, I can not see a halo or s.th. similar, sorry --Taxiarchos228 16:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC) Thanks. The halo is only in the thumbail. QI for me, I like it--Lmbuga 19:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Alte Laube1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:00, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Brunnen an der Schopfheimer Straße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI IMO, very nice composition --DKrieger 22:09, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Gasthaus zur Krone1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good! --Florstein 16:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Haus Mulsowstraße 16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, please remove one light dust spot and delete the note afterwards. --Iifar 17:59, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zell - Bürgerbüro.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 23:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Hotel-Bijou-Hochhaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 15:20, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schopfheim - Wiesenbrücke5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 15:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Evangelische Chrischona Gemeinde2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 17:31, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Hellbergschule3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 17:31, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Werkraum1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 15:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Maria Magdalena Square in Kraków.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope, imo.--MrPanyGoff 17:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Main Post Office in Kraków, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope.--MrPanyGoff 17:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Town Hall Tower in Kraków, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in rich scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wasserturm Rheinfelden (Baden), exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support All criteria satisfied. However, the camera location could be improved. It appears to have been taken alongside Friedrichstraẞe. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tüllingen - Ottilienkirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 08:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Haus Franz-Ehret-Straße 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality & very sharp. --NorbertNagel 19:09, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Musikladen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Werkraum3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Vassil 12:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Villa Fehr4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Wasserwerk3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Schloss Beuggen - Torhaus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Alte Laube2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - St. Josef von Osten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 10:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Landscape Formation One1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. DimiTalen 11:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Hotel-Bijou-Hochhaus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality but improvable crop, I included a note with a proposal Poco a poco 10:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC) I prefer the original crop. The tree and the car connects the building to the ground.--ArildV 11:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC) I agree with ArildV, beside of this I already made a image (Lörrach-Stetten - Hotel-Bijou-Hochhaus2.jpg) with a similar crop supposed by Poco a poco --Taxiarchos228 14:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC) Ok, convinced, Poco a poco 16:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)...And the two pictures should be QI with opposite arguments ?--Jebulon 17:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC) Jebulon, please, mark it with "discuss" if you don't agree, I would then provide my point of view, that is the game rules Poco a poco 19:48, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good IMO.--ArildV 12:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Olympiaturm

Hallo, das mit dem Bild File:Olympiaturm, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 25.JPG (und andere) habe ich mich damals auch gefragt. Die Einstellungen (ISO, Verschlusszeit, Öffnung) sehen alle gut aus und Kamera+Objektiv sind ganz okay (und neu!), zum Entwicklen nutze ich Photoshop 5.5. In der Tat ist es aber ein bisschen Geräusch zu sehen. Für mich ist dieses Bild dennoch grenzwertig und akzeptable für eine QI, deswegen die Nominierung, andere Bilder wie diese sahen sogar schlechter aus und werde ich so nicht nominieren können. Ich habe auf jeden Fall eine neue Version hochgeladen, ist besser geworden. Grüße, Poco a poco (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hasel - Erdmannshöhle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 17:25, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen - Evangelische Kirche8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Selbymay 15:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Wasserturm Bruderholz11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality but a small ccw tilt.--ArildV 12:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC) I have improved it, but it was only 0,2°. --Taxiarchos228 15:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC) Ok.--ArildV 16:34, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wiesenbrücke (Schopfheim).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Meets all criteria. This is the only image we have showing the bridge from bank to bank of the river. cmadler (talk) 13:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 23:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

siehe VI

nur falls Du es noch nicht mitbekommen haben solltest. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Metzgerei2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 11:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Villa Rustica2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Keymeulen 11:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Hellbergschule4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 07:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Gasthaus zur Krone2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Iifar 20:01, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tegernau - Gesamtansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Looks pretty good to me, but the sky has many light dust spots. --Iifar 16:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC) I have fixed them, hope I have not forgotten one --Taxiarchos228 21:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC).  Support QI to me now. --Iifar 19:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schönau - Bergkirche9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 10:38, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Union Station1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 16:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Todtnau - St. Jakobus der Ältere14.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Todtnau - St. Jakobus der Ältere14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 16:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Friedensbrücke9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 11:46, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Montmorency Wasserfall1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 14:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Röttler Kirche - Glockenturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok for QI --Carschten 15:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Reiss Mühle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Bitte noch gerade ausrichten, ansonsten sehr gute Qualität und schöner Ausschnitt. --Carschten 18:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC) wo ist denn hier etwas krumm? --Taxiarchos228 19:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC) Gute Frage. Es wirkt in Vollauflösung warum auch immer schief, ist jedoch nach Nachmessung bis auf minimale Stellen gerade. Sorry! QI. --Carschten 19:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tour de Doping.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 09:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Chambord nachts 2.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting --Moroder 08:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Nikolauskirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 09:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Steinenstraße6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Selbymay 07:33, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Unterdorfstraße 17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 21:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Steinenstraße6a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 12:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Gasthaus Waldhorn1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 22:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Alte Laube3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 22:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Todtnau - St. Jakobus der Ältere4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 22:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schopfheim - Wiesenbrücke6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 10:25, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gresgen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments There is much too much of street here imo. See annotation for suggestion of a tighter crop. --Cayambe 15:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC) I understand your argument, but the street belongs to the landscape impression too. I would say it is a question of liking that doesn't affect the quality of this image. --Taxiarchos228 15:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC). Of course, you are right. I used to argue in the same way for my own photos... but have changed my mind since. No problem for me if some other user promotes the image. --Cayambe 16:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC) There are two dust spots which need to be fixed. I wouldn't mind seeing the crop uploaded as a derivative work. Mattbuck 10:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC) dustspot eliminated --Taxiarchos228 21:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Villa Rustica3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 10:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Rathaus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 13:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Steinenstraße27.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 11:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Maibaum2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 11:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Detail8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice detail --Moroder 10:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Heizhaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 10:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Festhalle3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- JLPC 20:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Erik Zabel

Hello Taxiarchos,

Sorry for the confusion, I saw the file now promoted, glad for you. To be clear, this picture appears to be 908ko on my screen, I don't understand why if you say it's more than 2Mp... Anyway, it's a good picture. Congratulations by the way for your impressive work. :) --Selbymay (talk) 19:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Villa rustica (Lörrach-Brombach).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 05:22, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Grosser Saal (Goetheanum).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 05:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Fridolinskirche, Lörrach, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 05:25, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Erik Zabel Tour 2006.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 07:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Thor Hushovd Prolog2006.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI and useful --PierreSelim 07:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Maibaum1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. -- JLPC 07:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Villa Rustica1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 07:12, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Gedenkhain2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 21:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Bach an der Ringstraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 11:50, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Gasthaus Waldhorn6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Oberster Gerichtshof von Kanada.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Eisenbahnbrücke2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
IHK Nürnberg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support But what does "IHK" stand for? Is this a common German abbreviation? cmadler (talk) 13:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • IHK stands for "Industrie- und Handelskammer", translated to English: "Chamber of Industry and Commerce". --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 17:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 07:29, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Gasthaus Waldhorn3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Óðinn 19:19, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Lingert.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 14:51, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stiftskirche Niederhaslach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good composition, file size could be higher for better detail res IMHO --Moroder 12:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Lörracher Straße1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 20:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Evangelische Chrischona Gemeinde.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 20:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Supreme Court of Canada Building, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Graz Hauptbahnhof, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:57, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Glashaus am Goetheanum.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Meets all criteria; best in scope. cmadler (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Collégiale Saint-Florent de Niederhaslach, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good work, all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zollfreie Straße - Tunnel1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The red and white bar in the center is a bit disturbing; but QI for me -- Aisano 17:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halifay - NS - Skyline2a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 05:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schliengen - St. Leodegar24.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 11:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nürnberg - Lorenzkirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI IMO. But 2 dustspots.--ArildV 08:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC) didn't noticed them, but I have removed them now --Taxiarchos228 08:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC) Thank you.--ArildV 08:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tüllinger Berg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 17:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Haus Ringstraße 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 17:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Holzen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 08:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Fridolinschule6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 11:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Bank of Canada Building, exterior of historic part.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment It seems that the entire building is not visible on this image.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:23, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
You are right, but the entire building is also not visible on the other images in the scope. This part is the well known because it is the historic building. The rest is the newly built part. IMO this picture represents this building best. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

•  Comment Although I understood. The scope should be reduced to "historic Building". --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:11, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I did not said that this is best image all time but I think it is the best image of all we have. The best picture of this building you would probably shoot from the Peace Tower. From street it's not possible to get the complex. On the other hand I wonder if a aerial view is really better because you will not see the historic part so good. Also this one File:Bank of Canada March 2012.jpg shows not all parts. But this problem you have with all buildings. You have to reduce on one representative side and this picture shows it IMO. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:32, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
  •  Comment I understand very well your point of view, because I have this problem back often unmanageable. But at that time it reduces the scope to Facade and bell tower etc.. It's more satisfying.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
    • changed --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Best in new scope. All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schliengen - Lorettokapelle1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Iifar 10:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Haus Hauptstraße35.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fine with me. --Iifar 10:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beat Zberg TdF2006.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I like it, but too tilted, see the background--Lmbuga 20:57, 26 May 2012 (UTC) not any more --Taxiarchos228 20:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC) The tilt is gone but why did you change the proportions? The picture is now almost square, before it was 3:2. -- Aisano 17:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC) I was not to handle otherwise when you rotate the picture --Taxiarchos228 14:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC) Was a caching problem. Acceptable now. -- Aisano 17:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Festhalle4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Dull building, but QI to me. --Cayambe 14:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)) Not QI to me, too tight; but you're a special user and I don't want conflicts (I do not like your procedures, sorry). I dare not comment on the image because I fear conflict--Lmbuga 20:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Eisenbahnbrücke1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok to me. --Iifar 10:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Inzlinger Straße 10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schöne Postkarte :-) --Ralf Roletschek 08:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Alte Gewerbeschule2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 10:42, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schliengen - St. Leodegar22.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, please clean a couple of dust spots on the sky and delete the notes afterwards. --Iifar 09:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Maybe could we promote pictures only after the removal of noticed issues ?--Jebulon 15:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Villa Rustica9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 16:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Firma Kuhs.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bunny ranch? --Mattbuck 16:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC) indeed it was the former building of a firm for angora rabbits, but nowadys it is a company for cosmetics --Taxiarchos228 19:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zollfreie Straße - Tunnel2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Focus is a bit close, but ok. Mattbuck 16:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Brunnen in der Hüsingerstraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Olympiaturm, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 18.JPG

Hallo Taxiarchos, du hast dieses Bild mit der Begründung "strong bloom" und zu dunkel abgelehnt. Ich habe eine hellere Version hochgeladen, aber, was meinst du mit "strong bloom"? Darüberhinaus hast du auch gemeint, dass dieses Problem in fast allen meinen Bildern zu sehen ist. Meinst du dabei, dass sie lediglich zu dunkel sind, oder dass sie zu dunkel sind und zu viel "bloom" haben? Grüsse, Poco a poco (talk) 16:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Damit ist der Grauschleier gemeint. Irgendwie scheint entweder Deine Kamera einen gewissen Farbstich zu produzieren oder aber Du bearbeitetest das Bild in der Software nicht korrekt. Die Bearbeitung macht das Bild auf jeden Fall deutlich besser, einen deutlichen Farbstich hat das Bild aber trotzdem. Viele Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Inzlinger Straße 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)...with tight crop above and below and overexposed clouds...--Jebulon 20:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Friedhof2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice image --NorbertNagel 12:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schliengen - Gasthaus zur Sonne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schliengen - Transformator2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pressekonferenz nach dem Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) Oleh Blochin1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, QI to me, --Letartean 18:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) Kameramann2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 17:37, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Dornach_-_Goetheanum_-_Westtreppenhaus6.jpg

Glueckwunsch. Da ist Dir ein wirklich sehr aesthetisches Bild gelungen! Gefaellt mir sehr gut. --Dschwen (talk) 17:40, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. It is good stuff! --Slaunger (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Vielen Dank. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Haus Tumringerstraße 244 und 246.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 17:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Background too noisy Poco a poco 20:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC) actually the foreground is the main object of this picture and not the backgreound, but I have denoised it anyway --Taxiarchos228 08:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC) Good quality (IMO the original version was better, NR always come with a price and some noise at full resolution from a 12mp camera isnt a big problem).--ArildV 12:50, 4 June 2012 (UTC) Well, to me the current version is by far better than the original one. The team is the main object but that noise background was disturbing to me. How did you get such a professional picture?! Poco a poco 18:24, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Innsbruck?

Bist du schon vor Ort? Kannst du mir Tips geben? Bewahrt das Hotel die Ausrüstung für mich auf? --Ralf Roleček 21:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Nö, ich fahre morgen früh los und bleibe auch bis übermorgen Abend. Die Ausrüstung ist lt. Kurt schon im Hotel. Innsbruck selbst kenne ich bisher leider auch nur vom Durchfahren. Wenigstens soll das Wetter doch nicht so schlecht werden wie zunächst vorhergesagt. Werde versuchen am Samstag auch noch gute Bilder von der Bergisel Schanze zu machen, immerhin von Zaha Hadid gestaltet. Ansonsten das Goldene Dachl nicht vergessen. :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:09, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Hier ist Bilderbuch-Postkartenwetter. Hab schonmal die Stadt per Bus und Tram erkundet, sollten schöne Fotos dabei sein. 20:30 beginnt das Spiel, 19:00 ist Einlaß. Früher wollt ich auch nicht hingehen oder? --Ralf Roleček 14:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Nö, 1 h vorher reicht völlig aus. Stadion und das ganze drumherum ist auch deutlich kleiner als in Deutschland. Wir hatten am Samstag auch tolles Wetter. Die Stadtbilder mache ich die Woche auch noch fertig. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Bilder des Länderspiels

Hallo Taxiarchos, coole Sache, Hut ab, habe ich mir ja gedacht. Hast du einen Dauerschein oder war es eine einmalige Sache? Soweit ich weiß sind die Anforderungen eine solche Akkreditierung über Wikinews zu erhalten (wo ich früher auch recht aktiv war) sehr anspruchsvoll. Kann ich irgendwo nachlesen, was die Voraussetzungen sind, um bei so etwas mitmachen zu dürfen? wäre ggf. interessiert. Viele Grüsse, Poco a poco (talk) 21:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) 35.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 08:08, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Tüllingen - Weinweg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iste Praetor 18:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Tüllingen - Schneckenstraussi5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and sharp.--ArildV 17:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Tüllingen - Schneckenstraussi1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moonik 14:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Jugendherberge3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Maybe the sky is a bit greenish? --NorbertNagel 19:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Donauturm Wien Turmkorb.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 14:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) 43.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Haus Hauptstraße30.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good photo. --Florstein 17:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Tüllingen - Schneckenstraussi2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 09:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pressekonferenz nach dem Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) Oleh Blochin3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Haus der Stadtmusik.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 11:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Eckhaus Maria-Theresia-Straße, Salurnerstraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good! - A.Savin 10:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Stadtturm3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --JLPC 08:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Annasäule1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 21:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Maria-Theresia-Straße4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 09:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Haus Stainerstraße 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Pavillion.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 15:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Altes Landhaus (Tiroler Landtag)1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Please remove the dust spot in the sky. --NorbertNagel 20:07, 10 June 2012 (UTC) the "dust spot in the sky" is a far away bird --Taxiarchos228 10:23, 11 June 2000 (UTC) Seems ok to me. Mattbuck 21:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Bergiselschanze3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mattbuck 21:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Haus Steinenweg1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Tiroler Kunstpavillon.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Selbymay 09:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Tiroler Kaiserjägermuseum2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Selbymay 09:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Hofburg2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 21:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC) Comment...With a nice barrel distorsion and an unbalanced composition IMO...Let's promote !--Jebulon 09:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Stadtturm2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 07:51, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Panorama2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Couple small parts bit overexposed and maybe couple dustspots on sky, but overall ok. --Kallerna 11:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Landestheater5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 07:51, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Tiroler Museumsbahn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 10:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Landestheater3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --ArildV 09:07, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Innbrücke Hungerburgbahn1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 18:37, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Landestheater Innsbruck, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tiroler Kaiserjägermuseum, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope.--MrPanyGoff 21:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Altes Landhaus, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment It would be helpful to remove the note (and the black dot) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

the black dot is a far away bird and not a dust spot, beside of this I don't think it's disturbing --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The bird not but note yes. :)--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

removed now --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

•  Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:40, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tivoli-Neu, Innsbruck, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Annasäule Innsbruck.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
ORF Landesstudio Tirol, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Triumphpforte.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in, rich, scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Stadtturm (Innsbruck).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Probably „Innsbruck Stadtturm“ would be a better name for the scope because now all City Towers (Stadtturm) are in the competition.--MrPanyGoff 06:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

you are right, done now --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

• Well, I have some hesitation but finally I  Support it.--MrPanyGoff 20:59, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 20:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Panorama1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Could have got more crispness, but still OK. - A.Savin 09:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Herzog-Friedrich-Straße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Triumphpforte1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Florstein 16:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Innufer3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice colours --Moroder 15:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Kiebachgasse1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --ArildV 08:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Triumphpforte2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Too much perspective correction IMO, looks too deformed Poco a poco 11:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC) I don't see anything wrong with this correction, pardon me. Perspective correction is always wrong for a human eye (imho)--Moroder 18:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Wiltener Basilika.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:30, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Maria-Theresia-Straße2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 09:36, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Landestheater2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 21:44, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Landestheater1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 16:35, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) 44.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 18:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) 33.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 18:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Tüllingen - Schneckenstraussi3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 10:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Landestheater4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- MJJR 09:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Altes Landhaus (Tiroler Landtag)2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 11:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Hofkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality but needs geocoding --Moroder 12:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 13:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nørre Nebel - Friedhof.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nørre Nebel - Kirche8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fine with me. --Iifar 16:58, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Unterdorfstraße 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good photo. --Florstein 17:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Friedhof3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 11:45, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basel - Antoniuskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

D7000 und Staub

Hi Wladyslaw, Die automatische Sensorreinigung ist vielleicht für unterwegs ganz nett, aber gerade größere Staubkörner sind früher oder später wieder auf dem Sensor. Der Staub wird damit ja nicht aus dem Kamerageäuse entfernt sondern nur irgendwie abgewischt/abvibriert. Meine D7000 habe ich seit September 2011. Ich wechsele öfter mal das Objektiv, auch unterwegs und mußte schon wiederholt manuell reinigen. Meist nur mit dem Giottos Blasebalg, habe aber auch schon 2x feucht gereinigt (mit hochreinem Methanol und CCD Swabs). Zuerst hatte ich irgendwelche chinesischen Swabs verwendet, deren Reinigungsflüssigkeit stark schmierte. Methanol ist nach meiner Meinung die beste Reinigungsflüssigkeit. Ist zwar giftig, sollte aber in den benötigten µl-Mengen unkritisch sein.

Was mich wirklich nervt, ist, dass ich in meinem 105er Makro-Objektiv beim Durchschauen eine Reihe von Staubkörnern sehe, die ich nicht entfernen kann. Sind aber auf den Fotos nicht zu sehen.:-) Gruß Norbert

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Reethaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments God bilde. --ArildV 10:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Skavenhus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments God bilde. --ArildV 10:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Pfarrhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Adolf-Pichler-Platz1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok now. --Cayambe 21:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Tivoli Stadion2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --AzaToth 19:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Seilergasse1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments can't find any techincal errors in this image. Question though which buildings are straight in reality or not --AzaToth 19:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Strand2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 11:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Skavenhus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality but we need more too. --Selbymay 09:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Hafen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality but we need more info. --Selbymay 09:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Hafen3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. DimiTalen 15:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Innufer2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nørre Nebel - Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 10:17, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Camping.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality -- George Chernilevsky 09:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Neuapostolische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:14, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Friedhofskapelle3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 10:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Friedhofskapelle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me now. --Cayambe 16:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Bergiselschanze7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Improved as requested. --Mattbuck 21:20, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Haagen - Schlossberghalle4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Steinenstraße6 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nørre Nebel - Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --NorbertNagel 16:00, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Brückenstraße2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --AzaToth 21:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Evangelisches Gemeindehaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. -- JLPC 18:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Westtreppenhaus4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Selbymay 06:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Skavenhus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --ArildV 13:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nørre Nebel - Hauptstraße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good -- George Chernilevsky 19:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Neuapostolische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me -- George Chernilevsky 19:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Tivoli Stadion1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 12:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - Briefkasten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:50, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Pfarrhaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skaven - Strand.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Innufer1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:GR - Steinkirche Cazis2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:GR - Steinkirche Cazis2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:00, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk - Leuchtturm5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, perhaps only very slightly tilted to the left. --Iifar 09:35, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk - Leuchtturm8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, perhaps only very slightly tilted to the left. --Iifar 09:35, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dannebrog1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality image for me --SanglierT 05:52, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Review

Hallo, was sagst du zu dieser meiner Nomination? Gruss --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 06:23, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mailboxes in Denmark.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:49, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 05:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Varde Kirke (Varde Church), exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 05:37, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk - Leuchtturm2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 19:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 20:12, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvand - Bunker Atlantikwall3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, good quality.--ArildV 19:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk - Leuchtturm9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 05:37, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Dom St. Jakob1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 05:58, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvand4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 16:05, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Ponte Vasco da Gama 25.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ponte Vasco da Gama 25.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåbjerg Klit5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 15:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC)This is called "Blåbjerg" too, and it is not the same thing. What is really a Blåbjerg ?--Jebulon 17:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC) Blåbjerg is a name (blå: blue in danish and bjerg: mountain). The word bjerg (berg in in Swedish and Norwegian) can also be used to describe e.g. small hills ​​(although there are other words). Blåbjerg, is Denmark's highest dune. --ArildV 20:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)Thank you very much for explanations. So the names of the nominations, and the descriptions in file pages are not relevant enough ?--Jebulon 09:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice light, good image --Carschten 13:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåbjerg Klit6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)This is called "Blåbjerg" too, and it is not the same thing. What is really a Blåbjerg ?--Jebulon 17:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC) both --Taxiarchos228 21:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - Restaurant Big World.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Cute facade, good photo. --Florstein 06:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - Touristeninformation.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Danrok 16:57, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

BMW 4 Zylinder

Hallo Taxiarchos, ich habe die Nominierung vom 4 Zylinder zurückgezogen. Ich fand die Nominierung kein Unding, aber es war in der Tat kein Top Bild. Ansonsten vermisse ich seit ein paar Tagen Rückmeldung von dir zu diesen 2 Bildern, die m.E. viel besser geworden sind:

• File:Edificio principal, Jardín Botánico, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-21, DD 17.JPG
• File:Rabelos en el río Duero, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 09.JPG, dieses habe ich sogar inzwischen für FP nominiert und erst mal sieht es nicht schlecht aus.

Viele Grüsse, Poco a poco (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Poco a poco,

bei QIC steht der Promotion der Bilder meiner Meinung nichts im Weg, habe ich nun nachgeholt. Das Bild vom Fluss Duero ist ganz hübsch, finde es aber für FP vom Arrangement nicht ansprechend genug. Weil ich aber einer möglichen Wahl nicht im Weg stehen will werde ich mich dort eher nicht äußern ;-) Grüße zurück --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die Reviews und die ehrliche Meinung, bis denne, Poco a poco (talk) 21:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

P.S. von einem "Unding" bei der Nominierung habe ich nicht gesprochen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:51, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Hauptbahnhof4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 08:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arlesheim - Domkirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The perspective seems a bit curious, but ok. --Mattbuck 12:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Haus Unterdorfstraße 16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvand2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Blåvandshuk Lighthouse, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Good choice, best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:26, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Hauptbahnhof1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 11:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Hauptbahnhof7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iifar 15:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Bibliothek.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Minor sky overexposure at the left, but nevertheless QI for me. --Iifar 15:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Entfernungs- und Richtungsanzeiger.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good to me. --Iifar 15:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 17:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - Straßenschild St.-Nikolai-Kirchplatz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 11:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Musikkonservatorium1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Friedhofskapelle1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 09:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Jugendherberge1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 09:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Hauingen - Friedhof4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice -- MJJR 19:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Varde_-_Restaurant_Sillasens_Hus.jpg

I have not much to add, this current version is not QI for me. Imo the bright part of the sky should be more grey. Regards! --Ivar (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet1.jpg

And also:

• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet10.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet11.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet2.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet3.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet4.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet6.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet7.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet8.jpg
• File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet9.jpg

Yours sincerely cmadler (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• Also File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet5.jpg. cmadler (talk) 15:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Musikkonservatorium3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Florstein 08:08, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Water Tower Esbjerg, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Esbjerg Power Station, chimney.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Geocodage needed. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

added --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

•  Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Esbjerg Vor Frelser Kirke, exterior.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope. -- JLPC (talk) 10:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Vor Frelsers Kirke1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 07:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk - Leuchtturm6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 07:11, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Villa Rustica4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 06:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Brombach - Villa Rustica5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 06:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - St.-Jacobi-Kirche9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 08:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Wegweiser Goetheanum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 08:45, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Altes Gerichts- und Arrestgebäude.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Florstein 07:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 20:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for explanation

You were brought up at COM:AN/B due to this edit. Care to explain? -mattbuck (Talk) 23:58, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - St.-Jacobi-Kirche10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me; --JLPC 07:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Where is Henne? Please add geocode. --Cayambe 05:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Offene Rückmeldungen

Hallo Taxiarchos, das Musikkonservatorium habe ich gerade promoviert, ansonsten wollte ich nachfragen, ob du auch zu den erwünschten Verbesserungen bei:

• File:Puente Don Luis I, Oporto, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 02.JPG
• File:Museo de BMW, Múnich, Alemania2.JPG

was sagen kannst. Grüsse, --Poco a poco (talk) 19:45, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Poco a poco, alle Bilder, zu denen ich einen Kommentar hinterlasse schaue ich mir nochmals an. Auch wenn es manchmal ein paar Tage dauern kann bis ich reagiere ist ein gesonderter Hinweis hier in der Regel nicht notwendig. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:37, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, angekommen. Poco a poco (talk) 21:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Smial 07:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Nikolaischule.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Smial 07:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Varde - St.-Jacobi-Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:29, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esbjerg - Musikkonservatorium2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, but can you get rid of the parcial street lamp on the right? Poco a poco 11:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 19:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blåvandshuk3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Stift Wilten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Maria-Theresia-Straße.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 09:00, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henne Strand11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Warum hat das noch keiner durchgewunken? --Smial 01:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Esbjerg - Mennesket ved Havet10.jpg

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Mennesket ved Havet.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

•  Oppose I've nominated this image, as well as all 13 others of this work, for deletion. Danish freedom of panorama applies to buildings only, not works of art, and this is copyrighted until 2068 (70 years pma).
  • Your arguments are not durable, see here. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I suggest waiting until closing of deletion request. Otherwise, we will just be duplicating the discussion there.--Pere prlpz (talk) 17:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
•  Support - Yes, I'm not satisfied of the sky colour too, but anyway it is the best in the category by now. I also support the nomination in the name of the meaningful encyclopedia.--MrPanyGoff 09:32, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:26, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bork Vikingehavn1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Florstein 20:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bork Vikingehavn15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 07:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bork Vikingehavn7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:20, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Innsbruck - Adolf-Pichler-Platz2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. --Florstein 15:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Dachstuhl3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 13:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Identification added at QIC nomination.

Common gull (Larus canus) at harbour in Ringkøbing

Hello Taxiarchos228, just to let you know that I have added the identification of your QI nomination of the gull that was identified in FP discussion. -- Joydeep (talk) 13:36, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ringkøbing12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Florstein 10:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ringkøbing28.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--ArildV 09:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ringkøbing - Train Station1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good! --Florstein 10:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Template:QICpromoted/layout Template:QICpromoted

FP nomination

Hello Wladyslaw. I suggest you nominate one of these works to FP: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (needs a noise reduction in the sky), 7. Tomer T (talk) 11:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

PL:Ilustracja na medal

Cześć! Zgłosiłem twoje zdjęcie File:Auditorio de Tenerife Pano.jpg do głosowania jako ilustracja na medal w polskiej wikipedii. Przebieg głosowania możesz zobaczyć na tej stronie.

dziękuję --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP

Hi,

You systematic opposition does not seem to be productive. It seems you like to be alone against everybody else. :( Yann (talk) 06:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, what exactly is your problem? You know this: Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters? --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Brasilia

Hallo Wladyslaw, es stimmt, dass ich noch so manche Bilder von Brasilia in der Reserve habe. Leider fehlt mir zurzeit die Zeit sie zu bearbeiten und hochzuladen... besonders da noch viele andere Bilder in der Wartestellung stehen... aber das kennst Du ja auch. Trotzallem... in den nächsten Tagen werde ich einige Brasilia-Bilder hochladen und unter QIC stellen. Alles Gute, --Cayambe (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Darauf bin ich sehr gespannt! --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

de:Datei:Muensterplattform Bern2.jpg

Beim Upload ging der Inhalt der Dateibeschreibungsseite verloren. Im Log ist nur ein Teil davon enthalten, die Lizenz fehlt. Unter welche Lizenz stell(te)st du das Foto? --Leyo 10:00, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Unter GNU-FDL --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. --Leyo 15:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Nun unter File:Muensterplattform Bern2.jpg hier. --Leyo 13:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Bewertungskriterien für Qualitätsbilder

Hallo Taxiarchos, zunächst danke für Deine Antwort auf meine Kritik an den Bewertungskriterien für „Qualitätsbilder“. Wie schon gesagt, wundere ich mich, nach welchen mir nicht ganz einsichtigen Kritirien die Fotos ausgezeichnet oder abqualifiziert werden. Erstaunt bin ich überdies, dass nicht mehrere Juroren über die Auszeichnung oder Abwertung entscheiden. Siehe hierzu auch meine Gedanken auf oben genannter Diskussionsseite. Herzliche Grüße -- Spurzem (talk) 20:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Habe gerade zum spezifischen Bild was geschrieben. Dass die QI zum großen Teil nur von einer Person entschieden wird hängt mit dem Grundkonzept dieser Auszeichnung zusammen; und die finde ich auch grundsätzlich in Ordnung. Aber wie bereits hier erwähnt: wenn Dir eine Begründung inkonsistent oder nicht nachvollziehbar erscheint dann stell es zur Diskussion und dann müssen auch andere Entscheiden, ob sie die Meinung des Erstbewerters stützen oder nicht. Dass es dennoch Entscheidungen gibt, über die ich manchmal den Kopf schüttle bleibt nicht aus. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Wow factor und Sonstiges

Hallo Wladyslaw, wahrscheinlich werde ich Dir und auch einigen anderen schon lästig mit meinen kritischen Anmerkungen zur Bewertung der Qualitätsbilder in den Commons. Trotzdem melde ich mich wieder. In den Richtlinien heißt es, die auszuzeichnenden Bilder sollten einen „wow factor“ aufweisen, das heißt, sie sollten ansprechend, spannend, interessant sein. Außerdem werden korrekte Belichtung und einwandfreie Schärfe erwartet. Meine Frage ist, inwieweit beispielsweise der weiße Setra-Bus (File:Setra S416GT-HD bus from Slovakia.JPG) diesen Anforderungen gerecht wird und als Qualitätsbild gelten darf. Das Bild ist an der Längsseite des Fahrzeugs viel zu hell – oder kannst Du die Schrift auf der Längsseite ohne Weiteres lesen? – und ab dem Vorderrad ist die Aufnahme unscharf. Einwandfreie Bilder wie „mein“ Sauber-Mercedes beim Abbremsen am Ende der Zielgeraden des Nürburgrings hingegen werden wegen „bad crop“ abqualifiziert. – Bitte nicht falsch verstehen: Es geht mir nicht so sehr um „meine“ Bilder, sondern um die kaum nachvollziehbare Bewertung allgemein. Freundliche Grüße -- Spurzem (talk) 21:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Lieber Spurzem,

leider weiß ich nicht so recht, was ich auf Deine Anmerkungen antworten soll. Es kommt auch einem Vergleich von Äpfel mit Birnen gleich wenn Du das Bewertungsschema von zwei unterschiedlichen Menschen nebeneinander setzt. Dazu kommt, dass der "wow factor" gerade eben nicht für die QI sondern für die FP entscheidend ist. Genau das ist genau genommen sogar der springende Punkt. Ich fürchte, Du hast überlesen, dass dies als grundlegender Unterschied dort aufgeführt ist. Das Busbild ist ein absolut technisch und motivisch einwandfreies Bild, daher QI. Wenn Du damit nicht einverstanden bist, dann stell das Bild ins Review. Und wenn ein Fahrzeug nicht komplett auf dem Bild ist, dann mag es dafür eine Menge nachvollziehbarer Gründe geben aber ganz sicher fällt es durch das Raster als QI, und das meiner Meinung auch zurecht. Übrigens kann es durchaus sein, dass ein Bild zum FP gewählt wird obwohl es den QI nicht genügt wenn der "wow factor" so überragend ist, dass man über diverse technische Unzulänglichkeiten drüber weg sieht. Grüße zurück --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Wladyslaw, ich verstehe Dich nicht ganz. Vor allem komme ich mit den Abkürzungen nicht ohne Weiteres zurecht (FP?). Der von mir beispielhaft genannte Bus ist ab dem Vorderrad unscharf, und die Längsseite ist zu hell (oder kannst Du die untere Zeile der Schrift lesen?); über die motivische Darstellung mag man unterschiedlicher Meinung sein. Inwiefern ist also dieses Bild „technisch einwandfrei“? – Ich will jetzt nicht noch einmal meine Bilder aufzählen, die „durchfielen“, wundere mich aber schon ein bisschen. Und Deine Empfehlung, von den Juroren als QI eingestufte Bilder ins Review zu stellen, hat zwei Haken: Zum einen weiß ich nicht, wie man das macht, und zum anderen will ich nicht den Zorn der Autoren auf mich ziehen. Andere Frage: Wie kann man Juror werden? -- Spurzem (talk) 22:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

FP steht für featured picture (auf Deutsch: exzellentes Bild). Juror kann jeder werden und wenn Du die Überzeugung vertrittst und dafür einstehst, wer sollte Dir dann böse sein wenn Du Deine Ansichten klar darlegen kannst? Ob Du das nun machst bleibt Dir überlassen. Das Bild von dem Setra ist für mich technisch einwandfrei scharf. Sowohl das Vorderrad ist klar wie auch der hintere Teil. Man kann sogar erkennen, dass es sich um einen Firestone-Reifen handel und die (für mich völlig irrelevante und zu vernachlässigende) Werbeschrift an der Seitenfront ist ebenfalls lesbar (UNIWORLD. Boutique River Cruise Collection). Ich gebe zu, dass dieser Schriftzug schwerer zu lesen ist, aber das hängt weniger mit mangelhafter Schärfe als (1) mit dem schrägen Winkel zusammen und (2) weil wir hier eine sehr dünne Schrift auf weißem Grund haben. Insgesamt ist es sowieso schwierig, einen weißen Bus zu fotografieren weil die Gefahr der Überbelichtung gegeben ist. Das ist hier meines Erachtens nicht der Fall. Unscharf wird das Bild erst bei den hinteren Rädern, was aber durchaus vertretbar ist und nicht relevant für das Gesamtbild. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Wertvolle Bilder in den Commons

Hallo Wladyslaw, kannst Du mir bitte erklären, wie man eine Datei zur Wahl als wertvolles Bild bei den Commons einstellt? Es scheint eine recht komplizierte Sache zu sein. Herzliche Grüße -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 17:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Lothar,

trotz deutscher Anleitung es ist in der Tat ein wenig trickreich und ich habe mich am Anfang auch etwas schwer getan. Grundsätzlich kann man bei den valued image candidates VIC entweder ein Einzelbild (image) oder eine Serie (set) nominieren. Einzelbilder dürfte selbsterklärend sein. Ein Serie benötigt mindestens zwei Bilder eines Objekts oder eines bestimmten Vorgangs. Beispiele dafür findest Du hier. Je nachdem ob Du ein Einzelbilder oder eine Serie nominieren möchtest wählst Du unter diesem Abschnitt die Nomierungsmaske für image oder set aus. Der Name hinter Commons:Valued image candidates/ ist frei wählbar. Ich wähle meist den englischen Begriff des Motives, was ich kandidieren möchte. Dort öffnest Du das Editierfenster und trägst zwingend folgende Punkte ein:

1. Hinter |image= überschreibst Du {{subst:SUBPAGENAME}} mit dem Dateinamen des nominierten Bildes (ohne File:)
2. Dann kommt der wichtigste Teil. Du musst den Bereich festlegen, für welchen das Bild nominiert (scope). Ein scope ist nicht zwingend deckungsgleich mit der Kategorie, in der sich Dein Bild befindet. Du kannst hinter der Kategorie noch eine Einschränkung machen, z.B. Category:XY-Kirche, exterior, wenn Du eine Außenaufnahme der XY-Kirche kandieren lässt.
3. Die Orientierung ist standardmäßig auf Querformat eingestellt. Wenn Du ein anderes Format normierst kannst Du es dort ändern.
4. Der Grund der Nominierung ist optimal. Ich trage meist dann den Grund ein wenn ich mir nicht sicher bin, ob die Reviewer wirklich den Wert des Objektes ermessen können. Dann liefere ich noch ein paar sachliche Gründe.

Wenn Du das alles eingetragen hast speicherst Du die Unterseite ab, die Du dann auf der Hauptseite über die doppelte geschweifte Klammer einbindest.

Hoffe ich habe das wichtigste nun einigermaßen verständlich zusammengetragen. Wenn Du Dich an der ersten Nominierung versuchst und es nicht gleich klappt, schaue ich gerne nochmal über die Syntax. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank, Wladyslaw, für die Mühe, die Du Dir gemacht hast. Die Sache scheint recht kompliziert zu sein; aber ich werde es in den nächsten Tagen einmal probieren. Viele Grüße -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 21:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Flight upon Lörrach

Dear Taxiarchos228, I'm very happy of being able to support you on behalf of Wikimedia Deutschland with your flight around Lörrach. Please be so kind as to inform me, when the fotos are uploaded so I can use one of them an the project page. Cheers, Christoph Jackel (WMDE) (talk) 09:34, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Und ich? Will auch über Wolfsburg und Eberswalde fliegen! Es sieht übrigens reichlich albern aus, wenn Christoph dem Wlady englisch schreibt ;) Ralf Roleček 10:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Christoph, habe die Bilder schon bearbeitet. Ich werde sie vielleicht schon heute Abend hochladen. Gebe Dir Bescheid, keine Angst :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Ein Teil ist bereits hochgeladen. Siehe: Category:Fotorundflug Raum Lörrach/ Basel 20. August 2012. Rest folgt noch. Ich kann auch gerne einen kleinen Bericht bzw. ein paar meiner Erfahrungen aufschreiben. --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey super, klasse, sehr schön & danke --Christoph Jackel (WMDE) (talk) 11:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Taxiarchos228, deinen Kurier-Bericht über den Flug fand ich sehr interessant. Vielen Dank dafür! Habe ich diese deine Bemerkung so aufzufassen, dass auch solche stilistischen Anpassungen unerwünscht sind? Viele Grüße --Wiegels (talk) 14:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Wiegels, nein, damit waren nur inhaltliche Veränderungen gemeint wozu ich auch das Einfügen dieses sinnfreien Links zählen. Rechtschreibefehler, stilistische Verbesserungen und dergleichen zähle ich nicht dazu. Hätte das Wörtchen "inhaltlich" vielleicht noch dazu schreiben sollen. Freut mich, dass Dir der Bericht gefallen hat. Viele Grüße und Danke für Deine Anpassungen :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 21:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Vier Tilden

Hallo Wladyslaw, mit den vier Tilden gibt es bei den Commons-Kandidaten offensichtlich ein Problem, das anscheinend nur wenige User betrifft, unter anderem mich und auch jemanden, der vor Kurzem ein Bild eingestellt hat. Eigenwilligerweise kann ich unter Consensual review einwandfrei signieren. Das ist also ein Zeichen dafür, dass Java bei mir installiert ist und dass ich nichts falsch mache. Woran kann es liegen? Herzliche Grüße -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Lothar, habe deine Frage auf der Diskussionsseite von QIC bereits gesehen. Allerdings kenne ich mich nicht aus und kann dazu nichts sagen. Tut mir leid. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Mulhouse - Town hall.jpg

fyi: print --Martina talk 16:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Danke für die Info. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 05:09, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Pending QI promotion

Hallo Taxiarchios,

thanks for your comments and congrats for your work. I wish you could write on QI page if you see any improvement in these two files you noticed :

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lege_-_Chateau_de_Bois_Chevalier_02.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chartres_-_Hotel_Postes_02.jpg

Thanks again!

--Selbymay (talk) 09:17, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Noise reduction

First of all, thank you very much for writing to me. I've been working and testing various noise reduction tools, I'm loving gimp, however, the noise reduction is not very good, in the best case. The problem with noise reduction is lost detail and clarity. The observed image without noise now, however, there is loss of detail. I do recommend the use of Lightroom, if you do not have this software send me the raw file to see what I can do The Photographer@gmail.com. Thank you. --The Photographer (talk) 20:53, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Taxiarchos228, What do you think? --The Photographer (talk) 13:31, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

It's better now, mainly the picture of the city hall. Thank you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Remember to use your raw store, we do not know what the future brings us technology, to repair them. May the force be with you --The Photographer (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I love This picture, could you send me the raw file?, I could try fix the noise and light problems --The Photographer (talk) 20:07, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Noise reduction

First of all, thank you very much for writing to me. I've been working and testing various noise reduction tools, I'm loving gimp, however, the noise reduction is not very good, in the best case. The problem with noise reduction is lost detail and clarity. The observed image without noise now, however, there is loss of detail. I do recommend the use of Lightroom, if you do not have this software send me the raw file to see what I can do The Photographer@gmail.com. Thank you. --The Photographer (talk) 20:53, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Taxiarchos228, What do you think? --The Photographer (talk) 13:31, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

It's better now, mainly the picture of the city hall. Thank you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Remember to use your raw store, we do not know what the future brings us technology, to repair them. May the force be with you --The Photographer (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I love This picture, could you send me the raw file?, I could try fix the noise and light problems --The Photographer (talk) 20:07, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

KEB-Nominierung

Hallo Taxiarchos228, bist du mit dieser Nominierung in KEB einverstanden? Viele Grüße, --Quartl (talk) 08:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

File:Aerial View - Freiburg im Breisgau-JVA.jpg

Hallo Taxi, kannst du hier bitte noch die Koordinaten einfügen? Danke und Gruß, --Flominator (talk) 17:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Hallo, ich traue Dir zu, dass Du die Koordinaten selbst eintragen kannst. Schließlich stehen sie im Artikel, wo das Bild eingebunden ist. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Charmant wie immer :) Es ging mir um die Koordinaten des Standortes, von dem aus das Foto aufgenommen wurde. --Flominator (talk) 17:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Ach weißt Du Florian: ich kann mich noch gut an Deine grundlosen Auswürfe erinnern und auch daran, dafür nie eine Entschuldigung vernommen zu haben. Du wirst Verständnis dafür haben, dass ich auf deine Gegenwart verzichten kann. Die Koordinaten des Standortes sind irrelevant. Interessant ist hier maximal die Flughöhe. Ich bitte von weiterer Kontaktaufnahme durch Deine Person abzusehen da ich diese als Störung empfinde. Danke. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:54, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank You for the Wikipedia Pictures

Hello, My name is Duane Hurst and I recently made a free (non-commercial) English web site to share information with people. I added links to your Wikipedia/Wikimedia freeware pictures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Paris_-_Eiffelturm_und_Marsfeld2.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hohenschwangau_-_Schloss_Neuschwanstein1.jpg). I also gave credit to you on my web pages for your work. Thank you for sharing with the public. My website is:

http://www.freeenglishsite.com/

I add pictures such as yours to one of the following major sections of my site: 1. World section - contains information and over 10,000 images of every world country and territory. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/index.htm

2. USA section - contains information and images of every USA state and territory. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/usa/index.htm

3. English section - "Mel and Wes" lessons in conversation format. Stories are located in various USA states and world countries such as China, England, Germany, Japan, Mexico and Thailand. Each lesson has many slang terms and idioms, which I link to my Slang Dictionary. This eventually will have over 5,000 terms. Currently, it has about 3,000 slang and idioms. I regularly add new lessons and slang terms. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/lessons/index.htm Slang Dictionary link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/slang/Eslang_a.htm

Prior to retirement, I taught English at several private and public universities in the United States.

Please share this free site with your friends. I hope all will enjoy the pictures and find the English information useful. Sincerely,  Duane Hurst in Utah, USA

Email address: duanerhurst@freeenglishsite.com --75.162.209.2 16:19, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Korrekturanregung Münsterplattform

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Berner_Muenster_mit_Plattform_und_Aare.jpg

German description: Müsterplattform

correct: ... MüNster...

best regards --Helium4 (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Den Buchstaben zu ergänzen wäre weniger aufwändig gewesen als diese Meldung hier abzusetzen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

2013!

		* * * 2013 !!! * * *
		Hallo Wladyslaw! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Georgij -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:02, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Frohes Neues Jahr 2013

Frohes Neues Jahr 2013

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 17:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted