User:A.Savin/Archive/2013/1

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 05-2012 Kremlin 20.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Sheremetev Palace at Fontanka.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:59, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Simeon and Anna Church 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Simeon and Anna Church 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments In technical manners ok. But wikipedians should always carry this tool along. --Smial 21:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 03 snow.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 03 snow.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Tauride Palace 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 University Embankment 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Strong support Nice light and very good dramatic sky. --Iifar 16:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 University Embankment 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Taldom listed 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Vassil 17:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Taldom listed 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:18, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 05-2012 Kremlin 22.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Isiwal 12:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Editwar

Hallo,

kannst Du dem Zeitgenossen Biopics mitteilen, dass er auf der Seite Commons:Quality images/Recently promoted keinen Editwar um eine Formulierung führen soll, die vielleicht seine Privatmeinung wiedergibt aber auf keinem Konsens gewachsen ist. Zudem verweigert er auch offensichtlich jede Diskussion darüber. Ich habe entsprechendes auf der Disku von QIC hinterlassen. Viele Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Das Sperren der Seite ist m.E. aber kontraporduktiv, da dort die ohnehin hängigen Kategorisierungen nun noch länger warten müssen. Außer Du erledigst sie :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Ist nur für 6 Stunden. Ich kann nicht nur BP verwarnen, da ja Ihr beide editwarrt. --A.Savin 11:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Ich sehe einen Unterschied darin, ob man lediglich den Urzustand wiederherstellt oder ob man eigenmächtig Regeln etablieren will und auch darin, ob man diskussionsbereit ist oder nicht. Dass Biopics ein Radaubruder ist wissen wir beide, ebenso wie dass er sowas nicht zum ersten mal macht. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hm? Besser wäre es mMn, wenn das Tool Kategorienvorschläge machen würde, basierend auf der Kategorie des Bildes. Wenn man, wie jetzt (mache ich zum erstenmal...) für jedes der Bilder eine Kategorie aus dem riesigen Dropdown auswählen muss, dann ist das eine ABM-Maßnahme und macht fehlerhafte Kategorisierungen wahrscheinlich. --A.Savin 12:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Das ist sicher nicht ganz von der Hand zu weisen. Andererseits müsste das Tool (wohl nur aus den Kategorien heraus) erkennen, um was für ein Objekt es sich da handelt. Kannst ja mal Daniel fragen, ob sowas mit vertretbarem Aufwand automatisierbar wäre. Ich hätte nichts dagegen. Allerdings ist im Moment eben manpower gefragt und da brauchen wir nicht Schlauermeiersprüche nach dem Motto "Finger weg, wenn Du Tiere nicht korrekt kategorisieren kannst", zumal das richtige Einsortieren ja nicht nur für Tiere wichtig ist sondern wohl für alle Bilder. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Schon mal vorsorglich die Bitte, die Seite nach Ablauf der Sperre unter Beobachtung zu halten, damit bei einer von mir befürchteten Fortsetzung des Editwars die Zustand auf den bisherigen wiederhergestellt wird und der Rabauke seinen Wunsch erstmal diskutiert. Dies sieht er wohl nach wie vor als nicht notwendig an. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

• Ist dir übrigens aufgefallen, dass Biopics seit der Sperre Bilder aus den QI-Kategorien entfernt, die seiner Meinung nach da nicht reingehören [1] ohne sie jedoch in eine andere Kategorie einzusortieren? Muss ich jetzt mit ihm wieder einen Editwar beginnen oder wie soll hier vorgegangen werden. Bei mir ist er definitiv beratungsresistent. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ich hatte schon Schreck gekriegt, da werde was massenhaft entfernt. Ist doch nur ein einziger Edit, habe ihn revertet und höflich darum gebeten Bilder aus QI Galerien nicht ersatzlos zu entfernen. Hättest du genausogut machen können. Keine Panik... --A.Savin 19:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ein einzelner Edit? Bitte sieh dir nicht nur seinen letzten Edit an sondern auch die fünf davor. In einem Edit hat er fünf Bilder entfernt. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:56, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ja, da waren zwei Bilder die nicht zugleich in eine andere Kategorie verschoben wurden. Habe es jetzt auch repariert (hoffentlich). Reicht imo so noch nicht aus um böse Absichten zu unterstellen. Vielleicht hat er das tatsächlich nur vergessen. Keine Ahnung. Abwarten, würde ich sagen. --A.Savin 20:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

[2] --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

qi

Please restore version before Wlad's edit warring occurred. Counter productive edits by named user add a lot of work in cleaning up the mess afterwards.  B.p. 12:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Yusupov Palace at Fontanka.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 CA Poco a poco 10:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Please check new version. --A.Savin 11:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Not there yet, see note Poco a poco 13:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Yes sorry. Pls. check now --A.Savin 13:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 buildings 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 buildings 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Помощь ALDOR46 !!!

С Новым годом А.Савин! Я начинающий участник в Википедии. За полтора года подготовил около 100 статей о Героях Советского Союза и России из Адыгеи. Выставил в статьи портреты Героев, (видимо неверно указал лицензирование), фото простояли в статьях больше года и 3 августа 2012 г были удалены...(английским не владею). А.Савин, можно ли восстановить эти фото в статьи (хотя бы, которые я делал лично об отце Дорофеев, Анатолий Васильевич , и из семейного архива) или надо всё заново перезагружать?.. (По категоризации замечания принял)... Вообще, у меня цель- загрузить портреты и др. фото в статьи, а не на викисклад... С уважением ALDOR46 (talk) 08:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Я не знаю о каких файлах речь. Если вы фотограф или наследник фотографа, попробуйте загрузить их снова, проблем по идее не должно быть. --A.Savin 09:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Vorontsov Palace.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments more light would be nice, but it is enough for QI. --Rolf H. 10:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)  Comment Small problem on the sky. --Vamps 20:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC) Fixed --A.Savin 20:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 12:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 12:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 12:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Apology

I request an apology from you for unduly reverting of edits, for not showing good faith, for blocking the productive party in a conflict and for hampering this projects through your actions.  B.p. 10:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Now just don't exaggerate! This revert was fully correct, I actually think that both of you are productive contributors, and if you disagree with the block you may complain at COM:ANU. Here for me this discussion is over. --A.Savin 10:50, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

You are wrong and you know it. COM:ANU it will be then. I give you one more chance to apologize.  B.p. 10:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I am wrong with what exactly? That the revert was correct, or that both of you (B.p. and Taxiarchos) are productive contributors? Well, I honestly don't see it and so I'm leaving it now to you to complain. --A.Savin 11:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Regelungen der FPC

Hallo,

kannst Du dir mal bitte diese Abstimmung anschauen: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Köcherbaumwald-01.jpg. Tomer T behauptet, dass meine Stimme nicht zählen würde, da wenn sich nach 5 Tagen 10 Unterstützen finden eine vorzeitige Auszeichnung stattfinden kann. Das ist zwar generell richtig, aber da ich meine Stimme vor der Auswertung gegeben habe zählt sie m.E. trotzdem und damit ist auch die vorzeitige Auszeichnung nicht rechtens. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Das scheint mir eine Frage der Auslegung zu sein, somit sollte das eher auf Commons talk:FPC angesprochen werden. --A.Savin 21:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 12:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 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 Good quality. --Vassil 11:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Восстановление файла File:Sveshnikova Elena Ivanovna MSU.jpg

Уважаемый A.Savin, Вы предложили к удалению файл File:Sveshnikova Elena Ivanovna MSU.jpg с замечанием «Poor quality and no EXIF. Unlikely own photo by the uploader, suppose a TV screenshot». Файл был удален пользователем INeverCry.

Я могу повторно подтвердить, что эта фотография была сделана лично мной (при фотографировании Е.И.Свешниковой, а не телевизора), поэтому никаких формальных нарушений, как мне кажется, нет. Информация EXIF была удалена при обработке файла в графическом редакторе; низкое разрешение файла объясняется тем, что портретная часть изображения вырезана из бо́льшего фотоснимка. Файла с лучшим разрешением у меня, к сожалению, нет. О возникшей проблеме мне стало известно только после удаления файла.

Не могли бы Вы помочь восстановить файл «в связи со вновь открывшимися обстоятельствами» и подать заявку на восстановление файла? Albina-belenkaya (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Благодарю Вас за помощь. Albina-belenkaya (talk) 07:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 22:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Clevedon MMB 30 Pier.jpg

Hi mate, thanks for your comments on my nominations at QIC, I think I've corrected this one, would you mind taking a 2nd look? -mattbuck (Talk) 16:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Qustion about category redirects

Добрый день! Вы являетесь администратором, поэтому наверное знаете что и как Прошу немного помощи.

Проблема следующая: я загружаю изображения, которые хочу поместить в категорию Category:2012–13 Biathlon World Cup, однако эта категория содержит символ "–" вместо привычного "-", поэтому я, не заметив этого, поместил их в Category:2012-13 Biathlon World Cup. Как мне кажется, логично было бы сделать перенаправление на существующую категорию, чтобы было всем проще, однако #REDIRECT[[Category:2012–13 Biathlon World Cup]] не работает как ожидается, а шаблон {{category redirect|2012–13 Biathlon World Cup}} тоже ничего не делает, лишь сообщает мне что нужно убрать эти картинки отсюда и удалить эту категорию. Почему так? Как лучше поступить? Неужели нельзя сделать redirect? --Ximeg (talk) 23:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Моё мнение: здесь тире, в отличие от википедии, не употребляется (см. Category:Moscow-Saint Petersburg Railway и др.). Таким образом, ваши файлы следует поместить в Category:2012-13 Biathlon World Cup, а первоначальный вариант удалить за ненадобностью. --A.Savin 23:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо! Ещё вопрос: что означает вертикальная черта в категории, например вот так: [[Category:Biathlon World Cup|2011-12]]? --Ximeg (talk) 10:09, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Нужно для сортировки внутри категории (см. к примеру Category:Nature of Russia by region, там все области по алфавиту, потому что используют этот ключ - [[Category:Nature of Russia by region|Moscow Oblast]] и др.), а вот в случае, если название категории и так начинается с ключа (как в случае с 2011-12), это дополнение не обязательно. --A.Savin 10:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 buildings 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 buildings 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 buildings 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good! --Martin Falbisoner 15:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)~

File:Пихта грациозная (Abies gracilis).jpg

Can you check it out, if this image has correct license. Thanks in advance! --Ivar (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

The website has no info on licensing, here I've found the photographer's page. As it would be pity to have to delete this image, I'm going to mail him first. --A.Savin 10:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm gonna use it now in my Estonian Wiki article of Abies gracilis . --Ivar (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

ERROR: The requested URL could not be retrieved

Странная проблема с картинкой File:Biathlon 2013-016.jpg. Ссылка на изображение в полном размере не работает. --Ximeg (talk) 11:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

После переименования - кажется заработало. --A.Savin 12:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо большое! --Ximeg (talk) 13:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your nice reviews!

I wanted to thank you for your comment on the dust spot butterfly. I've uploaded another butterfly image version, I would like that You will review it, please. I have also uploaded another version of File:CORPOELEC Fuerzas Armadas, Maracaibo.jpg too, what do you thinking about?. See you A.Sabin, :) --Wilfredor (talk) 13:09, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 21.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 07:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Berlin-Steglitz Sep12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fehrbelliner Platz U-Bahn entrance sign.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grunewald Tower perspective Sep12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 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. --Poco a poco 20:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 a bit sharper, but acceptable. --Mattbuck 21:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 21:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 18:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 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 and composition. --Tuxyso 13:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 18.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 19.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 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 Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 21:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Martin Falbisoner 21:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Martin Falbisoner 21:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Tauride Palace 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 say it's ok --Martin Falbisoner 07:43, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 08:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peacock Island Sep12 img 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peacock Island Sep12 img 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 22.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 21:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Moscow 05-2012 Tsaritsyno 08.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Moscow 05-2012 Tsaritsyno 08.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 12:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peacock Island Sep12 img 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peacock Island Sep12 img 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peacock Island Sep12 img 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arkhangelskoe Estate Aug2012 sculptures 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 21:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

FP candidates : Aquila Chrysaetos

Following your comments I've removed the dark area on the picture of the flying golden eagle (list of FP candidates). Please have a look

Regards Juan Lacruz

Удаление

На каком основании, Вы удалили файл "Портрет_О._Гильдебрандт.jpg". который я сам лично сфотографировал в Третьяковской галерее, и загрузил на сайт??? Обьясните!--МаратС (talk) 19:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

На том, что нарисовали этот портрет не вы, автор умер в 1996 и от наследников явно нет разрешения. --A.Savin 21:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 05-2012 Lustgarten 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC) CA in the upper part of the image is still annoying. Kruusamägi 20:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)  Done Corrected. --A.Savin 21:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 05-2012 StSophia Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 22:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kerpen-Sindorf Church StUlrich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kerpen Schloss Loersfeld Vorburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Bit of CA, bit dull. Mattbuck 04:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)  Done New version. --A.Savin 18:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 06:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yegorievsk Aug2012 listed objects 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 think the crop is ok, but it's very dull. Mattbuck 04:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)  Done New version (the crop, however, is not extendable). --A.Savin 18:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 06:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Ryazan Airborne School

Приветствую. Вы удалили данную категорию 19 января с. г. Просьба восстановить. Дело в том, что Xardaas поменял все имевшиеся там файлы местами в новую категорию Category:Ryazan airborne institute. Зачем он это сделал — непонятно, но так как С. Шойгу вчера вернул заведению прежнее название. Смысла существования вышеназванной категории я не вижу, разве что в качестве редиректа. — George Serdechny 13:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Сорри за недоразумение. Я восстановил категорию. --A.Savin 14:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо.— George Serdechny 14:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vyborg 06-2012 various listed 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --MB-one 12:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peacock Island Sep12 img 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 08:32, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Check out my proposal to improve photo uploading!

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Easy_Media_Uploader

I'd love to hear your thoughts/comments.

Ashstar01 (talk) 04:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 05-2012 Novodevichy 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 17:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 05-2012 Kremlin 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Godot13 16:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - Hafen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Wilfredor 16:49, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - 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.--ArildV 14:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - Hafen5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Bilder löschen

Hallo, ich habe dich auf der Adminseite gefunden, weil ich ein großes Problem habe. Ich habe damals einige Bilder auf einem Privatgrundstück gemacht, ohne die Erlaubnis vom Inhaber dieses Grundstücks und der fotografierten Autos. Nun hat er mich angeschrieben, weil er die Fotos im Internet gesehen und will, dass diese sofort gelöscht werden sollen. Bitte, könntest du das machen? Ich habe schon gestern Abend einen Schnelllöschantrag gestellt, aber nichts passiert! Bitte!!! Danke... Luft+ (talk) 09:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC) P.S. Das sind die Bilder: [3] + dieser und dieses.

Danke fürs Löschen! Vielen Dank. M 93 (talk) 10:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 07 view from hill.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 02 snow.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Вопрос про Динамо

Добрый вечер. Скажите пожалуйста, без объяснения правок, просто откатывая, убираем и раскатегоризируем ясно видимую букву D? Станций метро "Динамо" только в России минимум две. Категорий "Динамо" минимум 15, причём их будет всё больше, и число дойдёт до нескольких десятков. С уважением, --Vizu (talk) 21:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Я не занимаюсь войной правок, а разгребал тот хаос, который вы устроили. Сначала научитесь правильно категоризовать файлы и категории, потом можем обсудить, какой вариант для станции метро вернее. --A.Savin 21:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Не устроил никакого хаоса. Редиректы спокойно ботом перевели бы в категорию "Динамо (станция метро, Москва)". Вы же узурпировали данную категорию исключительно для той станции метро, которую фотографировали лично. Откатив все другие правки. А люди будут добавлять категорию "Динамо" в свои изображения спорта. Причём постоянно. --Vizu (talk) 21:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

И ещё как устроили. --A.Savin 21:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

У кого голова на плечах - тот не станет добавлять фотки каких-нибудь футболистов в категорию московской станции метро, а фотки харьковской станции метро в категорию московского стадиона. Потому как сперва посмотрит, что вообще в этой категории содержится, или же - что лучше - удосужится включить HotCat в личных настройках, потому как в этом случае, чтобы ознакомиться с сутью категории не надо даже в нее заходить. --A.Savin 21:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Без бесконечных конфликтов редактирования мне, кажется, вообще нельзя уже ничего написать на своей же стрвнице обсуждения, гм? --A.Savin 21:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• ВП:НЕСЛЫШУ. Вы раскатегоризоваваете категорию, поставив станцию метро со своими фото. Вам всё равно, что туда будут добавлять другие фото по основной теме "Динамо" (Спортивное общество МВД) другие люди. Самое простое - просто стереть всем понятные категории. "У кого голова на плечах" - тот соблюдает ВП:ЭП и делает категории, в первую очередь логичные и понятные всем пользователям Википедии. "Что вообще в этой категории содержится" - стандартное название категорий с одинаковыми названиями станций метро именно такое, как называлась стёртая Вами категория. А что в ней уже содержится - не важно, поскольку категорий "Динамо" никак не одна и узурпировать её нельзя. Всё равно она будет переименована другим администратором. Согласно логике и стандартному написанию категорий для станций московского метрополитена. С уважением, --Vizu (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Не надо указывать на всевозможные правила википедии, я в этих сокращениях не особо разбираюсь и здесь вам не википедия и бюрократии куда меньше. Повторюсь: я не вижу проблемы в том, чтобы станция московского метро имела категорию Dinamo, а при той каше, которую вы там наварили, создав категории, являющиеся подкатегориями самих себя и поместив их ещё и совершенно некстати в категорию "D", я был вынужден вернуть всё на прежние места. Научитесь правильно расставлять категории, используйте HotCat (особенно те самые стрелки вверх-вниз), научитесь переименовывать категории без того, чтобы за вами приходилось убирать, тогда поговорим, что как именовать надо. --A.Savin 21:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• Обычные люди, загружающие файлы, не знают, что такое HotCat. Они не смотрят предварительно категории. Не ездят стрелочками вверх-вниз. Поэтому им надо огромное спасибо сказать, если они на свои изображения поставили хоть какие-то категории согласно логике, без которых никто это изображение не найдёт. И они будут ставить категорию "Динамо" именно в подавляющем большинстве случаев на спортивное общество. Поэтому сам вопрос не стоит выеденного яйца, а викисклад и так завален огромным количеством некатегоризованных файлов, которые поэтому нереально найти и использовать. (Например, раньше иногда по 10-15 часов категоризовал вообще некатегоризованные файлы по теме "Харьков" только по описаниям на разных языках (польском, английском, немецком). Но сейчас это стало совершенно невозможным из-за их количества.) Но если вы раскатегоризировали категорию, то оно мне надо? Тратить огромное количество времени на категоризацию, чтобы можно было изображения найти? Занимайтесь, пожалуйста, сами. Я не буду категоризовать спортивные изображения общества - документы, старые значки и фотографии, поскольку все они попадают в категорию метро. С уважением, --Vizu (talk) 11:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
• Предлагаю категорию "Динамо" отвести под общую как общество. В ней будут стадионы, команды, метро (станции метро также названы по обществу, т.е стадионам). --Vizu (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Это ваше субъективное мнение. Другие люди - другие интересы. Лично мне общественный транспорт ближе спорта, я вообще не подозревал, что над ФК существует ещё какое-то общество. Так что ваши попытки отодвинуть станцию метро на второй план - безосновательны. Максимум, что я могу сделать - перенести категорию ст/м на Category:Dinamo (Moscow Metro), а на прежнем месте устроить дисамбиг, а это самое общество поместить на Category:Dinamo (sports club) или что-то в этом духе. --A.Savin 12:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

А я про что?) Только общество "Динамо" (не клуб, клубов много) имелось и имеется практически во всех странах б. соцлагеря и оно не только спортивное (+гостиницы - дома отдыха - и проч.): . Но в подавляюшей части - спортивное. Поэтому предлагаю Category:Dinamo (sport) поместить в общую "Динамо", а в "Динамо (спорт)" помещать категории клубов (которых десятки), стадионов. (Кстати, множество фотографий станции Динамо Екатерибургского метро не категоризованы по станции). --Vizu (talk) 16:06, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Обвинение в вандализме

Обвинение в вандализме? При категоризации? ВП:ЭП, прошу Вас. Станция находится именно на Лубянской площади. Название станции написано на открытом письме. Неосуществлённый проект станции также будет фиктивным? Рисунок неосуществлённого Москворецкого моста (построен другой мост по другому проекту) также нужно раскатегоризовать? --Vizu (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Категория Lubyanka (Moscow Metro) - не о некоей абстрактной станции метро, долженствующей в фантазиях или в реальности быть расположенной именно на Лубянской площади; но о конкретной станции, построенной в 1935 году архитектором Н. А. Ладовским, причём не где-нибудь на Лубянской площади, но именно в том месте, где она и по сей день находится. --A.Savin 21:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• В самой категории об этом ничего не сказано. Куда же включать планы, эскизы и рисунки с открытками дореволюционного московского метро, если станция находится там же и называется почти так же? Никуда? Это разве не Московский метрополитен в фантастике, станция "Лубянская площадь"? --Vizu (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Нет, это не Московский метрополитен. В 1914 году он ещё не существовал. --A.Savin 11:54, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

До революции - существовал проект). Эскизы. О нём писали статьи в газетах и журналах. Вышла минимум одна брошюра о Московском метрополитене. Открытки. В какую их все категорию? --Vizu (talk) 12:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• Спасибо. --Vizu (talk) 16:01, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - Ullsteinhaus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 22:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spb 06-2012 Baltic Railway Terminal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 03 snow.jpg

Just thought I'd say that that is absolutely beautiful. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. FPC miss critical (!) reviewers, btw. Maybe you should sometimes have a look at some candidacies there. --A.Savin 18:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Wilmersdorf Okt12 RussKirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Spandau Okt12 Rathaus Turm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and quality. --Tuxyso 13:58, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - Ullsteinhaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 some additional perspective correction Poco a poco 22:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC) It's a short distance photo, no further straightening possible w/o significant bias --A.Savin 23:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC) Ok, convinced --Poco a poco 18:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Пинг :)

Приветствую! С помощью Рейва не удалось получить ответ на один вопрос; так что задам пока другой — было ли получено письмо? :) Анастасия Львова^ru (ru-n, en-2) 12:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Было --A.Savin 12:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Мне это посчитать как отказ?.. Анастасия Львова^ru (ru-n, en-2) 13:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Вы угадали. --A.Savin 13:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 01 wooden church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. -- Felix Koenig 12:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 03 snow.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 04 john baptist church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - Hafen4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 13:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Wilmersdorf Nov12 KathKirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Wilmersdorf Nov12 Schlangenbader Tunnel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin-Lankwitz 12-12 Siemens Villa.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC) I think there is some chromatic noise in the darker areas, can you fix that? Poco a poco 18:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Done. --A.Savin 22:25, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin-Lichterfelde 12-12 Petrus Kirche 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 light. --Tuxyso 12:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo rail platform.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:07, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo Estate in Jan2013 img09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:07, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo Estate in Jan2013 img06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Archiv QIC Januar

Hallo A.Savin, ich habe dein Edit in der Archivseite nun rückgängig gemacht, da ich davon ausgegangen bin, dass du es zwecks QICBot gemacht hattest. Da der Bot dennoch inzwischen im Archiv von Februar arbeitet, sollte man alle archivierten Bilder anzeigen. Ich denke, dass hattest du vor, und war in deinem Sinne, aber ich sage es dir mal zur Sicherheit. Viele Grüsse, Poco a poco (talk) 13:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh tut mir leid, das hatte ich tatsächlich vergessen. --A.Savin 14:50, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Green Week Berlin 2013 AS img 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Poor roe deer who end up in a kitchig exhibition but QI imo.--ArildV 20:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo Estate in Jan2013 img01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK for me. Insignificant chromatic aberration --Rjcastillo 22:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo Estate in Jan2013 img02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK for me. Insignificant chromatic aberration --Rjcastillo 23:00, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo Estate in Jan2013 img08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 23:01, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Green Week Berlin 2013 AS img 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Green Week Berlin 2013 AS img 15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Christian Ferrer 22:09, 03 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Green Week Berlin 2013 AS img 09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good shot - Kirua 22:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tempelhof 10-2012 - Ullsteinhaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! B-Spandau Okt12 Nikolaikirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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:Vyborg 06-2012 Castle 06.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vyborg 06-2012 Castle 06.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:04, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abramtsevo Estate in Jan2013 img11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 09:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Marrus orthocanna.jpg

Please see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Marrus orthocanna NOAA.jpg--Citron (talk) 09:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Why you do not cancel the latest version of File:Marrus orthocanna.jpg, as you did for mine ? It's always the same image with "no improvement in overall quality". --Citron (talk) 07:38, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

––––

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Olge_Klykov_fevral2013.jpg

по поводу Вашего комментария 23:12, 27 January 2013

Добрый день.

Прежде, чем делать комментарии,что "File:Портрет Иофиса Е.А..jpg Portrait made in the 1960s/1970s, scanned from a book. Unlikely own work by the uploader, no details on true author and permission. A.Savin 23:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)" хотелось бы узнать откуда такая информация? И что это за книга? Если учесть, что человека не стало в 1978 году фотографии в книгах делались методом офсетной печати - скан с иллюстрации невозможно спутать с фотографией (для специалиста)

Портрет из моего личного архива и никогда ранее не публиковался, фотография оцифрована с домашней фотографии, т.к. негатив не выжил. А Иофис Е.А. является моим родным дедом и размещенна была по просьбе моей матери - его родной дочери.

В результате Вашего комментария ещё один "продвинутый" пользователь: Deleted: INeverCry 01:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо Вам большое

closing review | Featured picture candidates

Hi, I just noticed that you closed my nomination per this edit. Could you explain why you closed this nomination before its official end on 19 Feb 2013 at 16:10:15 (UTC)? Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 21:21, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The bot closed it, I just confirmed. --A.Savin 21:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Could you explain why you confirmed the bot's closure of this nomination before its official end on 19 Feb 2013 at 16:10:15 (UTC)? Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 21:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I presume that the bot closed it per Commons:FPC#General_rules 8.1. If the bot has closed, then the nomination isclosed. If you disagree => bot owner, or COM talk:FPC. --A.Savin 21:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Apparently the bot just checks the number of supports, rather than if a single vote was actually added by the nominator or not. This bug has to be removed - I understand it's not your responsibility to do so. But I strongly disagree that "If the bot has closed, then the nomination isclosed." The automatically generated, unconfirmed bot result was approved of by your confirmation, which is baseless, since general rule 8.1 does not apply. A nomination is closed once it has been confirmed. My nomination is suffering from a disadvantage over other nominations through your action. How are you going to resolve this issue? Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 21:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The nomination has been closed & archived. I'm sorry for the confusion, but I really don't know how may I help. You're free to re-nominate your image. If you think that I should be punished, you're free to complain at COM:ANU, but please leave me alone here. --A.Savin 09:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Важное сообщение

В связи с возможными недоразумениями уведомляю, что мной (и не только) в разное время с сайта http://firstlady.kremlin.ru на который распространяется {{Kremlin.ru}}, было загружено много файлов (например File:Vera Glagoleva.jpg или File:Vladimir Hotinenko.jpg). После окончаниея президентства Медведева, контент указанного сайта был перенсен на новый домен — http://da-medvedev.ru (в настоящее время на этот домен стоит редирект), однако я гарантирую, что в момент загрузки указанных изображений они находились на субдомене kremlin.ru, и значит на них распротранялось разрешение {{Kremlin.ru}}. Прошу принять к сведению, и по возможности распространить данное сообщение среди админитстраторов.--Agent001 (talk) 00:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Теперь дальше. Я гарантирую, что содержимое сайта http://da-medvedev.ru/ полностью, вполть до верстки, скопировано с бывшего http://medvedev.kremlin.ru. Означает ли это, что поскольку СС является безотзывной лицензией, http://da-medvedev.ru мы можем причислить к {{Kremlin.ru}} не смотря на то, что там стоит знак копирайта (© 2013)?--Agent001 (talk) 00:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

IANAL, но я бы сказал - означает. --A.Savin 10:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Minsk Sport Arena.jpg

File:Minsk Sport Arena.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has 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 it, 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!

84.61.176.189 19:27, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prussian Landtag 2013 Interior 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:47, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prussian Landtag 2013 Interior 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:47, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Форум

Могу ли я узнать, за что вы удалили обе мои правки на форуме? Заранее спасибо. Quasiproton (talk) 18:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Не понимаю, что за правки вы имеете в виду. Если вот эти, то создайте отдельную тему и не засоряйте шапку форума. --A.Savin 20:57, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Хорошо.  Thank you. Quasiproton (talk) 07:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hanni Huesch 03-2013.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:18, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Романовский бал 1903 года

Добрый день! Не могли бы вы восстановить удаленные файлы, загруженные этим новичком (User talk:Angelic Mashka - тут список), с лицензией PD-RusEmpire? --Shakko (talk) 12:42, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Там водяные знаки по самую середину картинки. Такие файлы - только на помойку. Сорри --A.Savin 13:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prussian Landtag 2013 Interior 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:56, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much!

My image, "Bombax ceiba Flower in Lantau island, Hong Kong.JPG" was the first to be a quality image on Wikipedia! Thanks a million!--Earth100 (talk) 15:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Congrats. --A.Savin 15:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Savin,

I would like your permission to use your photographs of berlin subway station Wutzkyallee, U7 in posters I am making as a work of art for a competition of subway art. If my work is accepted I can share some of the oney with you.

My artwork; http://www.mikloslegrady.com/conceptual/artcrimes/index.html

Miklos Legrady 310 Bathurst st. Toronto ON M5T 2S3

http://www.miklosegrady.com

email; legrady@sympatico.ca

About Commons:Deletion requests/File:Երեւան.JPG

Hi, A.Savin. File:Kev Muni.jpg, File:Gaiff erevan.jpg, File:Moscow cinema in Yerevan.jpg, File:Yerewan cinema.jpg, File:Kev pic20.jpg etc. ? Takabeg (talk) 21:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:49, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Tiergarten skyline Mrz13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Kosmos rocket.jpg

Hallo A.Savin, dürfte ich Dich um Hilfe bezüglich dieses Bilds bitten? Es wurde von ru-wp nach Commons transferiert. Auf ru-wp wird diese russisch-sprachige Seite als Quelle angegeben, woraus offenbar geschlossen worden ist, dass das Bild unter {{Cc-zero}} zur Verfügung stehen würde. Könntest Du bitte überprüfen, ob das seine Richtigkeit hat? Danke und viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 07:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Die Bilder wurden dort auf tomsk.ru vom User Dmitry Shipulya hochgeladen und in der ru-wiki ebenfalls von einem Dmitry Shipulya. Es besteht für mich also vorerst kein Verdacht auf Bilderklau. Mfg --A.Savin 08:53, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Vielen Dank, A.Savin. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Список наблюдения

Привет! У меня к тебе просьба - добавь, пожалуйста, в свой список наблюдения файл File:Planned section.svg. Его время от времени вандалят, а я здесь стал редко появляться, могу пропустить. Заранее спасибо. --Art-top (talk) 20:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

:ru-speaker

Hallo A.Savin, kannst du hier eventuell mal kurz hineinschauen: Commons:Deletion requests/PersonalPhotoUploadsByUserSeronheliya; insbesondere wegen der etwas merkwürdigen Begriffe auf der Benutzerseite. Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 14:37, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Просьба

Здравствуйте. Удалите, пожалуйста, эту страницу. Заранее спасибо. --Stas1995 (talk) 09:35, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Вклад участника User:Geka b

Здравствуйте. Правильно ли я понимаю что следующие изображения загружены по подложной лицензиии:

• File:Territoria A logo.jpg
• File:Territoriya A in Skadovsk.jpg
• File:Tu-144 postcard.jpg
• File:VAZ-2103-icon.jpg
• File:Arktika (ship, 1975).jpg
• File:Perepis naselennya 89 USSR.jpg
• File:KAMAZ-5511 calendarik.jpg
• File:Rinat Dasayev.jpg
• File:Svyatogorsk-lavra card.jpg — эта скорее всего PD, но текущая лицензия явно ложная
• File:The-hollies USSR-card.jpg
• File:Tasma Bobina.jpg
• File:Biocenosis of activated sludge (Krivbassvodokanal).jpg
• File:Simplest types of microorganisms of the activated sludge (Krivbassvodokanal).jpg

с остальным вкладом вроде всё нормально. Но опять же у многих файлов указана не та лицензия, что должна быть. Плюс изображения в массе некатегоризированы. --ze-dan (talk) 17:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Открыл ЗКУ, когда те удалят разберусь с остальными файлами. --A.Savin 21:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Лицензирование

Уважаемый A.Savin у нас возникло непонимание.

Зачем же так рубить наотмашь? Я уже проходил вариант загрузки фотографий без лицензии, второй раз не ошибаюсь. За все свои фото могу ответить поименно. Давайте оговорим что не так в лицензиях, потому, что с лицензированием чужих фото все ОК, они либо с Wikimedia с лицензией CC-BY-SA 3.0, либо Panoramio с такой же лицензией как и загруженные другими учасниками мои фото, например File:Kryvyi Rih Gigant-Hlyboka.jpg

То, что Вы еще не успели удалить:

• File:Park Yubileyniy.jpg - CC-BY-SA 3.0
• File:Dzerzhinskij district Krivoy Rog.png - PD-UA-exempt
• File:Tram in Krivoy Rog.JPG - пеерзагружено с http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:%D0%A2%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%97_%D0%9A%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%A0%D1%96%D0%B3.JPG на Wikimedia, авторство указано.
• File:Mine Yubyleynaya.jpg - Разрешается использовать фотографию в любых целях при условии упоминания имени (ника) автора (CC-BY), ссылка на автора и фото есть.
• File:Ticket for Krivoy Rog trolley.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:LAZ trolleybus at the station Krivoy Rog-Chief.jpg - Разрешается использовать фотографию в любых целях при условии упоминания имени (ника) автора (CC-BY), ссылка на автора и фото есть.
• File:Electric train at station Krivoy Rog-Chief.jpg - Разрешается использовать фотографию в любых целях при условии упоминания имени (ника) автора (CC-BY), ссылка на автора и фото есть.
• File:Biocenosis of activated sludge (Krivbassvodokanal).jpg - собственная работа
• File:Simplest types of microorganisms of the activated sludge (Krivbassvodokanal).jpg - собственная работа
• File:Territoria A logo.jpg - часть следующего файла, свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Territoriya A in Skadovsk.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Tu-144 postcard.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:VAZ-2103-icon.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Arktika (ship, 1975).jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Perepis naselennya 89 USSR.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:KAMAZ-5511 calendarik.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Rinat Dasayev.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:The-hollies USSR-card.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Svyatogorsk-lavra card.jpg - свой скан, со своей коллекции
• File:Tasma Bobina.jpg - производное
• File:Dolgintcevskiy Rayon gerb.png - PD-UA-exempt
• File:VolodarkaRDA.JPG - собственное фото
• File:Utyos park 01.jpg - собственное фото

Притом, Вы удалили: Логотипы шахты гигант - оба моя разработка, Вид на рудник Дзержинского - фото мое

Уделите время для обсуждения, ибо отпадает всякое желание перерывать тонны файлов в интернете выискивая заветную лицензию с которой можно выступить в Википедии и сделать ее разносторонне наполненной.

Спасибо!

--Geka b (talk) 23:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Фотографии я особо не рассматривал, но вот сканы открыток, значков и печатных изданий не могут быть вашей работой ибо изображённое на них защищено АП. Собсно все сомнительные по моему мнению я перечислил выше. --ze-dan (talk) 00:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

+1, исключил пару файлов из ЗКУ, но для сканов требуется разрешение художника или его наследника. --A.Savin 10:27, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Все еще не понятно по следующим файлам:

• File:Park Yubileyniy.jpg - файл с Викимапии по глобальной лицензии CC-BY-SA 3.0, т.е. я имею право распространять этот файл на тех же условиях, я так и сделал
• File:Dzerzhinskij district Krivoy Rog.png - символ госвласти, общественное достояние, взято с офсайта, лицензия {-{PD-UA-exempt}-}, так само как, например, в (http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Coat_of_Arms_of_Ternivskyj_raion.jpg), к которому претензий нет.
• File:Tu-144 postcard.jpg - лицензия проставлена аналогично файлу File:Tupolev Tu-144 aircraft Soviet miniature sheet 1969.jpg на той же странице {-{PD-RU-exempt}-}. Почтовый блок сканированный, у него тохе есть художник, но к нему претензий нет. Непонятно.

• Там почтовый блок, у вас открытка - суть разные вещи. --ze-dan (talk) 19:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• File:Arktika (ship, 1975).jpg - лицензия проставлена аналогично файлу File:Convert ru Antarctica022.jpg на той же странице {-{PD-RU-exempt}-}. конверт тоже сканированный, и источник такой же, но к нему претензий нет. Снова непонятно.

• Вот тут немного непонятно. Марки не являются объектами охраны АП, а вот рисунки на конвертах и открытках скорее всего да (тем более лицевые стороны открыток, где знаки государственной власти вообще отсутствуют). Так что я бы попристальнее заинтересовался бы вкладом User:Anizotropia - скорее всего там тоже большая часть файлов с подложной лицензией. --ze-dan (talk) 19:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• File:Dolgintcevskiy Rayon gerb.png - символ госвласти, общественное достояние, взято с офсайта, лицензия {-{PD-UA-exempt}-}, так само как, например, в (http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Coat_of_Arms_of_Ternivskyj_raion.jpg)
• File:VolodarkaRDA.JPG - это моя собственная фотография
• File:Utyos park 01.jpg - это моя собственная фотография

--Geka b (talk) 13:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FrenchCathedral Mrz13 View04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FrenchCathedral Mrz13 View06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Prussian Landtag 2013 Interior 05.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Prussian Landtag 2013 Interior 05.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Требования для получения флага filemover (для переименования файлов на Викискладе)

Доброго времени суток! Мне такая мысль пришла, что неплохо бы иметь флаг переименовывающего файла на Викискладе. Не подскажете, пожалуйста, где я могу посмотреть требования для его получения? В Русской Википедии уже более полугода имею аналогичный флаг (filemover). Пришёл к такому мнению, что на Викискладе не раз попадаются файлы с довольно неидентификационными и порой глупыми названиями: File:Moscow 01.JPG, File:Churche, Moscow.JPG (тут вообще ошибка в названии). Я могу и знаю про механизм переименования файлов, путём подачи запросов на их переименование (requests), но полагаю, лучше будет, если у меня будет флаг — так временные и людские ресурсы экономиться будут. --Brateevsky (talk) 18:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Если не захотите больше иметь флаг - дайте мне знать. --A.Savin 18:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо большое! Я думаю, он мне будет очень полезен. --Brateevsky (talk) 06:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FrenchCathedral Mrz13 View03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 useful (maybe you could indicate the direction?) --Moroder 06:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Под угрозой удаления

Здравствуйте!

Вы выставили на удаление файл File:Peski-voinam-odnoselchanam.JPG. Фото не есть производным. А как же тогда используется фото File:Братська могила радянських воїнів та комсомольців-підпільників.JPG или это File:Brat mog kr2.JPG или это File:Babi-yar-2006-04-30.jpg? Нигде не указан ни автор ни разрешение от наследников, все монументы с территории Украины. Таких примеров много. По этой логике нужно удалить с Викимедии ВСЕ фотографии монументов с Украины, авторства-то нигде не проставлено да и разрешения наследников никто не просил (например, категория Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Kryvyi Rih). Закон об авторских правах я прочитал внимательно, но тогда для всех должны быть равные условия - если удалять, тогда у всех. Или как попасть в касту избранных, чьи фото не удаляются при таких же условиях использования?

Надеюсь на конструктивный разговор. Спасибо! --Geka b (talk) 21:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

На Украине нет свободы панорамы и таким образом все производные фотографии памятников, автор которых не умер 70 лет назад и не дал разрешение на публикацию под свободной лицензией, - подлежат удалению. Если не хотите, чтобы я весь ваш вклад просматривал - категоризуйте его правильно. Если мне приходится это делать за вас - то все нарушающие правила Викисклада изображения, всплывающие при этом, выставляются на удаление сразу. --A.Savin 22:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Дело только в категоризации? А примеры приведенные мной – Вы на них отреагируете или при правильной категоризации они Вас более не интересуют? Если так я проставлю категории. И что означает «производные фотографии»? Мой файл и есть сама фотография, а не производные от нее. А вообще-то совсем непонятно как при таком законодательстве можно было додуматься проводить конкурс типа «Вики любит памятники». Но ничего, конкурс идет, фото висят... --Geka b (talk) 23:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Не-а, дело не в категоризации, а в том, что я физически не могу отслеживать ВСЕ нарушения. Вы отказываетесь облегчать работу своим коллегам и категоризовать ваши загрузки правильно? Тогда нам так или иначе нечего более обсуждать. --A.Savin 23:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Нет, скорее Вы хотите избежать неудобных, но справедливых вопросов, обвиняя меня в отказе облегчить коллегам работу. Но это не так, я сказал что проставлю категории, мне было интересно только ли в этом дело. Да, а категория в этом файле была и была она на село где находится братская могила и монумент над ней. Но я так понимаю Вам не интересно и Вы разговор завершили, так тому и быть... --Geka b (talk) 23:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Но возникает вопрос относительно второго файла File:Utyos park 02.JPG Он прекрасно подчиняется закону Украины О авторском праве и смежных правах, а именно

Статья 10. Объекты, которые не охраняются

Не являются объектом авторского права: в ) изданные органами государственной власти в пределах их полномочий официальные документы политического, законодательного, административного характера ( законы, указы, постановления, судебные решения, государственные стандарты и т.п. ) и их официальные переводы;

Санаторий, как и парк, как и мыс Плака пока еще находятся в Государственой собственности, а соответственно и администрация чей стенд установлен тоже является органом государственной власти. Стенд является документом административного характера (можно рассматривать как инструкцию, закон дает свободную интерпретацию добавляя в конце и т.п.). На стенде присутствует Герб Украины, который защищен и охраняется этим же законом и не может быть использован не государственным органом. --Geka b (talk) 00:21, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

AFAIK такие таблички не являются госдокументами, но я не эксперт, спросите на ru:Википедия:Форум/Авторское право --A.Savin 08:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Необоснованное проставление сомнительного лицензионного статуса

Вами были помечены как сомнительные следующие видео-файлы:

• File:DM-494_shunting_on_Kievskaya_APL_MM.webm (оригинал)
  
• File:Crowded_train_in_India.webm (оригинал)
  
• File:Pantograph_breaks.webm (оригинал)
  

В данном случае все эти файлы, расположенные на сервисе YouTube, лицензированы там под Creative Commons - Attribution, в чём можно легко убедиться - для этого нужно пройти по ссылкам и нажать в описании видео кнопку Развернуть — там есть поле Лицензия, в которой у данных видео указано «Лицензия Creative Commons – Attribution (разрешено повторное использование)». Пройдя по лицензионной ссылке можно убедиться, что это CC-BY, которая позволяет заливать файлы и как угодно модифицировать их при условии указания ссылки на первоисточник. Специально для таких файлов на Викискладе существует шаблон Youtube CC-BY, который и приведён в их лицензионном описании. Специфическое же разрешение от автора (например через OTRS) требуется только в случае, если файл на YT лицензирован под Cтандартной лицензией Youtube или иной другой, не входящей в рамки PD и CC-BY-SA. В связи с этим ваша пометка является необоснованной.

Приведу пример на основе имеющихся на викискладе файлов - например файл File:Anti_ACTA_PROTEST_in_Ljubljana_,_Slovenia.webm перезалитый с Ютуба лицензирован там по CC-BY, и никаких спецразрешений на его использование не требуется, при этом на данный файл также было выставлено подтверждение админа Викисклада о том что он действительно лицензирован указанной лицензией. В то же время например на файл File:2008_05_29_Jason_Beghe_at_NYC_Scientology_protest.ogv получено разрешение OTRS, поскольку на YouTube он загружен под стандартной лицензией. ZCP4 (talk) 15:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FrenchCathedral Mrz13 View05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FrenchCathedral Mrz13 View02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Перемещение файлов с www.mediawiki.org на commons

Добрый день! Я хотел загрузить фотографии на commons используя KIPI uploader в digiKam, однако не заметил, что программа залогинилась на сайт www.mediawiki.org (логин и пароль ведь одинаковые!). В результате почти два десятка файлов загрузились не на тот сайт, который нужно. Есть ли простой способ перенести их все разом на commons?

Список файлов здесь: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ximeg

Извиняюсь за свою невнимательность. Заранее спасибо! --Ximeg (talk) 22:17, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Вообще-то я лично гружу всегда всё вручную, и вам того же желаю. На вашем месте я бы просто заново всё перезалил сюда, скопировав исходный текст от каждого из файлов (благо категории как я понял уже проставлены и особо уродоваться не нужно), а потом попросил бы какого-нибудь админа на MW их там быстро удалить. В качестве альтернативы существует CommonsHelper, правда, я им уже целую вечность не пользовался и особо помочь там не смогу, если что. --A.Savin 22:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо за совет, всё перезалил, ложные файлы номинировал на удаление --Ximeg (talk) 22:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kudamm Karree View from LietzenburgerStr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 07:59, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Oderturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, nice composition.--ArildV 09:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tauentzienstr from KaDeWe.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Nino Verde 09:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Brunnenplatz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Selbymay 09:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Marienkirche Glocke.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 11:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 HP Neuberesinchen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Faehre.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Nino Verde 12:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Bridge to Slubice.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! --Nino Verde 12:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Slubice Holy Spirit Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, fix CA at building sides and cross. --Nino Verde 12:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)  Done --A.Savin 12:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Admin

Sag mal, du glaubst doch nicht, daß nach deiner Sperraktion alles so weiter geht? Sperren in eigenem Sinne... - eine von wenigen Totsünden, noch dazu, wenn sie wie hier völlig ungerechtfertigt erfolgt. Ich dachte, du hättest dich zurück gezogen, dann hätte ich ja nichts weiter gesagt. Aber da du hier weiter machst, würde ich dir raten von selbst auf deine Adminfunktion zu verzichten. Oder nach deinem Mißbrauch müßten wir an der entsprechenden Stelle mal drüber reden. Samt der anderen Aktionen von dir, die zeigen, daß du als Admin nicht geeignet bist. Marcus Cyron (talk) 20:16, 21 April 2013 (UTC) PS: du wirst den Beitrag wie ich dich kenne löschen, was für mich bedeutet, daß du ihn zur Kenntnis genommen hast.

Ne, lass mal stehen. Kannst von mir aus gerne durch alle erdenklichen Instanzen gehen, bin mal gespannt was die Kollegen sagen wenn ich ihnen die Diffs mit deinen Beleidigungen und Lügen präsentieren werde. Völlig grundlose Beleidigungen wohlgemerkt, und für mich übrigens auch völlig unerklärlich, dass sie ausgerechnet von dir, einem ehemaligen Autorenkollegen, kommen. Aber egal, kannst dich wie gesagt gerne an die Admins, Jimbo oder wenauchimmer wenden, aber auf dieser Seite wird jeder weitere Kommentar (sprich: Trollerei) von dir künftig gelöscht, wobei ich mir im Falle massiver Belästigungen weiterhin eine Sperre - deutlich längere als einen Tag - vorbehalte. Frohes Schaffen noch, Adminkollege. --A.Savin 20:29, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Fernsehturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 for me. --Christian Ferrer 11:42, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

спасибо за фото нашей родной филармонии.

Thank You!

I see you promoted one of my images. Thank You very much! Can you also check some of the other images, also in the April 23 section?--Earth100 (talk) 13:50, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FFO 04-13 Kleist-Park.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 the verticals on the left are not straight, could you correct it? --Selbymay 10:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)  Done --A.Savin 10:27, 19 April 2013 (UTC)Better now. --Selbymay 20:45, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Question

Thanks for supporting my QI nomination of File:Israel-2013-Jaffa 10-Al-Bahr Mosque.jpg. I'm curious about your comment that the image looks "analogue." Could you elaborate? Thanks--Godot13 (talk) 02:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

It looks in full resolution a bit like a scan, the resolution is pretty high itself (even for modern full-frame DSLR's). The camera "Leaf" "Mamiya 645DF" I never heard of. So, is it an analogue camera? --A.Savin 08:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Village church in Briesen (Mark).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bakery in Briesen (Mark).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 13:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 12Apostles Church B-Schoeneberg 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 01:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 12Apostles Church B-Schoeneberg 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 01:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skyline B-Schoeneberg 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 01:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Tvardovskij.jpg

Добрый день, коллега! Взгляните, пожалуйста на файл и его источники. Этот швед не даёт файлу покоя ещё с enwiki, всё ему видится там какая-то подделка. Sealle (talk) 17:45, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• Спасибо! Sealle (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Снимок опубликован в 1978 году анонимно, охраняется до 2048 года. Вы начнёте удаление или я выставлю?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madlitz-Wilmersdorf Landschaftspark und Schloss 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 11:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madlitz-Wilmersdorf Landschaftspark und Schloss 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 11:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madlitz-Wilmersdorf Landschaftspark und Schloss 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 11:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Train stop in Briesen (Mark).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 moiré, but good quality nonetheless. --Jastrow 19:20, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skyline B-Schoeneberg 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharpness just ok, I suggest to crop the bottom, QI anyhow --Poco a poco 19:38, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dorfkirche in Madlitz-Wilmersdorf.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Demnitz Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 12:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Steinhoefel Schloss und Landschaftspark 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 14:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dom in Fuerstenwalde (Spree).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 09:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Villa Germania in Fuerstenwalde (Spree).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:48, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Samariterkirche in Fuerstenwalde (Spree).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 17:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lutherkirche in Fuerstenwalde (Spree).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 17:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Steinhoefel Schloss und Landschaftspark 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neuendorf (Steinhoefel) Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin view from Park Inn 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:17, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin view from Park Inn 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View from Humboldtbox - Berlin Cathedral.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ralf Roletschek 16:20, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

ru-Speaker

Hallo A. Savin,
wärest du bereit, die weitere Kommunikation mit Arsenikum 447 (talk · contribs) zu übernehmen, den ich vor 6 Tagen lediglich um die Autor/Quellen-Angaben für die 7 Einzelbilder in seiner Collage File:Collage1234.jpg gebeten hatte und der heute mit einer nationalistischen Attacke auf mich geantwortet hat[4]. Vielleicht reagiert er gegenüber einem Muttersprachler etwas rationaler. --Túrelio (talk) 16:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

ok --A.Savin 17:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 19:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 01 wooden church.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kolomenskoe in white - Dec12 - 01 wooden church.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:08, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prenzlberg SchoenhauserAllee U2 ramp.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Wedding Seestr U-Bahn Werk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 13:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Wedding Muellerstr Kreuzung Seestr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:23, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 althoug a bit more of contrast could help --Poco a poco 07:22, 1 May 2013 (UTC) great picture! --Ralf Roletschek 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 view. --Florstein 17:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Funkturm Berlin View 12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B-Lichterfelde Hindenburgdamm Klinikum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Left side needs perspective correction Poco a poco 20:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)  Done --A.Savin 21:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Steinhoefel Schloss und Landschaftspark 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Neutral Sharpness is good on the right and not so good on the left side. --Iifar 19:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC) Enough Quality. --Christian Ferrer 21:14, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Stoke-on-Trent railway station MMB 18 221139.jpg

This doesn't appear to be unsharp to me. I can fix the CA if you give me a week or so - I'm moving house so everything's a bit hectic. Would you be willing to change it back to /Nomination for now? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

What's the problem? Remove it, and nominate later --A.Savin 17:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Kloster Zinna Kloster 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:49, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Turm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Coyau 14:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Aussicht 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Aussicht 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Kloster Zinna Kloster 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Selbymay 11:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Kloster Zinna Gutshaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Atmospheric house. --Florstein 15:45, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Aussicht 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Nikolaikirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Kloster Zinna Kloster 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 16:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Neumarkt Jacobikirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 16:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Aussicht 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Christian Ferrer 16:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

a heads-up

In 2011 you participated in Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jcb_(de-adminship 2). That discussion ended with User:Jcb losing his administrator privileges.

This note is to inform you that User:Odder proposed Jcb have unconconditional access to administrator privileges restored.

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jcb (readmin) is scheduled to close on May 20th.

Cheers Geo Swan (talk) 23:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Featured pictures

Будьте добры, растолкуйте мне кратенько, зачем это существует? QI — это школа фотографа, который снимает всё лучше. А зачем нужно FP? Спасибо.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

На Викискладе изображения дня на заглавной страницы берутся из числа избранных, и из них же выбирают изображение года. Больше FP из России - престижнее для русскоязычного викисообщества. Лично мне этого достаточно в качестве объяснения. Если вас процесс FPC не привлекает - просто игнорируйте его. Если я на ваш вопрос не достаточно ответил - обсуждайте на Commons talk:Featured pictures candidates. --A.Savin 20:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо. QI будет, если соблюдать технологию съёмки. VI будет, если найти содержательно важный сюжет. А FP как появляется?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 22:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

User talk:KingAbsinthe

Здравствуйте. Абсолютно весь вклад названного участника с нарушениями АП. Причём прошло уже полгода после первой загрузки (и последовавшего удаления), но участник так и не удосужился изучить правила (см. его СО и вклад), но при этом продолжает настаивать на своей правоте (см. раз и два). Вследствие всего этого у меня вопрос: а а нужен ли ему флаг загружающего? --ze-dan (talk) 07:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Я файлы удалил и учётную запись блокировал на 6 месяцев. Очевидные копивио нужно помечать на быстрое удаление, поэтому RFD закрыл досрочно. --A.Savin 09:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Armenian FoP

You've recently undeleted a few Armenian FoP cases, but I can't seem to find any explanation for why you did so. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

There is commercial FoP in Armenia now, see COM:AN#Undeletion_of_Armenian_FOP-deleted_images. --A.Savin 21:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, just saw that. Thanks! ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Christian Ferrer 11:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jueterbog Altstadt Hedwigskirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sure, it's good quality, but is it possible to have a little little much of contrast? --Christian Ferrer 11:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC) I did it already, imo no longer possible without loss of quality --A.Savin 12:31, 12 May 2013 (UTC) Or maybe with a little less expo, I've tried on my PC and apparently there is no much loss of quality, else it's not very serious, it's just a personaly taste. --Christian Ferrer 13:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Frontone della Chiesa di San Nicola Tolentini.jpg

Hi Savin. You reviewed my nomination posing in question the focus on the picture. I put a note where the exact focus was. Could you please comment on that. I think that the picture is not out of focus at all. Am I wrong? Best regards --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:53, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I saw your note yes, but the gable still seems too soft to me. Sorry, it's just my opinion, other users might think different, you're free to put your picture to CR. --A.Savin 18:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

OK. Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 19:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Christian Ferrer 12:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Arcalino 10:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 detail 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 10:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Panoramic table, Les Aires, Hérault 01.jpg

Hi A.Savin,

Sorry to disturb you, You have decline this file and I have remove it to discuss because I have uploaded a new version. Could you take a look please and say me what you think about it?

Friendly, --Christian Ferrer 18:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Просьба

Здраствуйте A.Savin, как я могу получить статус автопатрулирующего или где дать заявку?--6AND5 (talk) 12:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Requests for rights, но не уверен, что у вас для этого достаточно правок. --A.Savin 17:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 18:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, clear, sharp. --Superbass 22:31, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Klinik 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Hakenberg Kleines Denkmal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Ajepbah 21:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Dechtow Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 22:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Wustrau Ruppiner See.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 22:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gagarin town - Former Annunciation Cathedral.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Florstein 16:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Обобщение

Здравствуйте, коллега!

Намедни вы забраковали мой танк. Нерезко-так нерезко. Но меня заинтересовало ваше обобщение о рецидиве. Поэтому мне было бы очень интересно узнать поконкретнее. А главное -чем можно помочь делу. Я ведь беру категории, как правило, из англо-вики из статей на сходные с картинкой темы. --Витольд Муратов (обс, вклад) 21:28, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Система категорий здесь не идентична англовики. Help:Categories, лучше чем там описано объяснить тоже не смогу, я не педагог. --A.Savin 21:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

FPC withdrawal notification

Good day, thank you for your notification (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mstyslav_Chernov). Sorry for incorrect withdrawal maintained, it was an uninteded mistake. All further withdrawal procedures (if any) will be maintained according to the established procedure. Sorry for inconvenience and thanks again for your advice and assistance. Best regards, Mstyslav Chernov

Тарасенко Вячеслав Михайлович

Не забудьте, пожалуйста, заблокировать и другую учетную запись участника Вячеслав Ольховский (ru:Википедия:Проверка участников/Вячеслав Ольховский) --Evil Russian (talk) 17:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

All the files uploaded by Kalaharih recently

Goodafternoon again, A.Savin,

First of all I now have seen, that a few subjects have already in the past been deleted, which are, my Selfportrait, or ('Autoportrait')a painting of my own face, which was then accepted after my explanation, then the Fountain 'Le Cotterd' of Ollon, which had the same fate, was deleted and then replaced with permission by user IneverCry, and equally so for the subjects

File:Emmanuelle Béart 1995 File:Bonjour Photo-etching File:Oilpainting Spain 2003, (bay with a wave smashing on the rocks) File:Ollon, Rooftops photo-etching 1981 15x25cm'81 File:La Sallaz Farm of the Abbey photo-etching executed by the artist File:Villars Mountainhut photo-etching 1981 15x25cm'81 and I repeat 'Autoportrait = the same painting as Selfportrait Meaning that 7 images or as you call it Files have already been discussed and were admitted, by IneverCry.

And the following files are therefore new and in discussion now, but still all this discussed is my own work, >New images now discussed for deletion present the same problem, I let go of my copyright which I own for my own work in this list:

File:De gehangenen printed with stone 55x70cm'70.tif maybe in english the title should be 'the hanged' ? File:Pepin Liria in bullring oilpainting 52x60cm'11.JPG File:Portrait of a topmodel oilpainting canvas 54x68cm'13.JPG File:Coupe Soleil oilpainting on canvas 54x69cm'13.JPG File:Russian topmodel oilpainting on canvas 68x90cm'12.JPG File:Col de la Croix near Villars Ollon 81x102cm'95.tif File:Spain Arenys de Mar oilpainting 40x46cm'09.JPG File:Penon de Ifach near Calpe oilpainting 69x79cm'03.tif File:Villajoiosa oilpainting 25x32cm'05.tif File:Muverans mountains watercolor 36x50cm'03.tif File:Cergnat mountain hut etching 21x27cm'86.tif File:Saint-Triphon profile watercolor 38x54cm'03.jpg File:Col de la Croix etching 12x25cm'86.tif File:Aiguenoire in the Diablerets etching 17x23cm'86.tif File:Tower Bâtiaz in Martigny etching 3pl. 31x42cm'84.tif File:Castle in Swiss Aigle etching 25x31cm'85.JPG File:Abbey 'la Salaz' etching 24x18cm'77.tif File:Posses-Dessous barn etching 24x31cm'80.tif File:Tower of St.Triphon etching 25x32cm'81.JPG

With many thanks for reading me and hopefully things will sort itself out, because personally I indeed can not do better, yours sincerely --Kalaharih (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Kalaharih and copyright

Hello A.Savin,

As I hope you did already understand, yet I still would like to make it more clear, and sorry if I was not before, I cannot log in or write an article but under my name Kalaharih, yet the images are mine, meaning Kalaharih is the same person as Hubertine Heijermans.

I certainly intend to give up my copyright, only I do not want to interfere with rules like not making publicity. The only problem is that there is no other way about my own paintings or etchings.

By the way I like your photos of Russia. My best teacher in etching and printmaking was Russian an is called Swietlan N.Kraczyna, born in Minsk. I owe a lot to him, but we are aging people now. With kind regards, --Kalaharih (talk) 15:11, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Dechtow Gutshaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 12:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Langen Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 12:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Klinik 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 a bit noisy, otherwise very good --Carschten 12:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Koenigshorst Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 colors and contrast. --Christian Ferrer 11:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Schinkel-Statue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 12:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Klinik 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Trinitatis-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 Good quality. --Florstein 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Temnitztal Garz Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Dechtow Gutshaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 12:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Langen Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 12:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Klinik 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 a bit noisy, otherwise very good --Carschten 12:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Koenigshorst Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 colors and contrast. --Christian Ferrer 11:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Schinkel-Statue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 12:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Klinik 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Trinitatis-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 Good quality. --Florstein 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Temnitztal Garz Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kronstadt SPB Port 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Betzin Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK --Christian Ferrer 11:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Wuthenow Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 12:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Fehrbellin Zentrum Altes Postamt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Carschten 12:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Hakenberg Aussicht vom Schlachtdenkmal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 IMhO a little too much saturation --Christian Ferrer 11:32, 29 May 2013 (UTC) Good quality IMO--Lmbuga 15:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)  Support Very nice --Christian Ferrer 05:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Улицы Петербурга по районам

Создавая категории по районам, не нужно было убивать общий алфавитный перечень - он нужен и полезен. --Kaganer (talk) 22:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Я ничего не убивал. Можно всегда при желании создать категорию Streets in Saint Petersburg by name и скопировать туда всё с помощью бота за пять минут. А вот наведение порядка в категориях, четверти из которых какие-то мудаки ещё и присвоили откровенно неправильные имена - работа отнюдь не пяти минут. --A.Savin 22:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedaechtniskirche 05-13 view 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Nice --Christian Ferrer 11:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Neuruppin Altes Gymnasium.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Nice --Christian Ferrer 11:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Danilishe_lake_view_1.jpg

Здравствуйте, вы предложили выдвинуть эту фотографию в featured pictures, но у меня есть сильное сомнение, что это изображение подходит под определение valuable. --Nino Verde (talk) 08:15, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

FP это имхо не то же самое что "Valued images". Но дело, конечно, хозяйское. --A.Savin 10:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Да я пошел почитать про "требования к номинаторам" и есть там пункт "Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others." который меня и смущает :) --Nino Verde (talk) 10:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Ну, по моим наблюдениям красивые пейзажи не так уж и редко получают звёздочку, хотя далеко не всегда даже используются где-то в статьях. Для сравнения посмотрите похожие FP, Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural. Насчёт most valuable, это скорее то, что должно быть в идеале. На практике достаточно "всего лишь" семи голосов за и вдвое больше за чем против. :) --A.Savin 11:02, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Хорошо, поглядим что из этой номинации выйдет :) --Nino Verde (talk) 11:23, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

вопрос о блокировке

Добрый день, A.Savin. Пару дней назад Вы бессрочно заблокировали учётную запись Serdechny, удовлетворив тем самым заявку Анастасии Львовой. Поскольку в самой заявке никакие ссылки на ОТРС тикеты не приведены, то я хотел бы узнать, основываясь на чём Вы заблокировали учётку бессрочно? Сама Анастасия отказалась отвечать мне, сославшись на усталость/недомогание/несправедливость мира/неблагодарность людей, которые не ценят её огромный вклад в Вики. Коленнопреклонная просьба к Вам: предоставьте эти ОТРС-тикеты, где содержится отказ на разрешение в свободной лицензии, и те файлы, которые были в итоге загружены. Если Вам вдруг это будет сложно сделать, то наверно уместно будет разблокировать запись Serdechny до прояснение обстоятельств. --Алый Король (talk) 11:25, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Karwesee Dorfkirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:50, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OPR Temnitztal Garz Gutshaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 It's a bit blurry and noisy at the right low part (especially at the house) --Christian Ferrer 17:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)  Support I change my advice, enough quality --Christian Ferrer 18:20, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

К удалению

Извещаю Вас коллега, что файл File:Ice Palace SPB at Bolshevikov.jpg выставлен мною на удаление. С уважением, --Martsabus (talk) 06:01, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MosOblast 05-2012 Marfino Estate 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Overall good in spite of sharpness drop on the left --Poco a poco 17:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow 08-2012 Petrovsko-Razumovskoe img01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 18:56, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mr Savin, had a huge favor to ask you in reference to one of your photos

   Mr Savin, I'm a huge fan of the Berlin zoo and its history, collect many things related to this zoo, i'm in love with the picture posted in the Berlin zoo Wiki entry by you, the aerial shot, and was wondering if you had any others, would love to be able to see them if at all possible. I can provide my email if you have any more aerial shots of the zoo.

   Take care and best regards.

Appropriately Licensed

You participated at the earlier discussion on licence choice for Featured Pictures. A number of users felt that such restrictions should be made at policy level. Please comment at Commons:Requests for comment/AppropriatelyLicensed. This is a proposal to amend this licence policy to disallow future uploads where the sole licence is inappropriate for the media (e.g., GFDL for images). In earlier discussions there were a number of comments that, while reasonable opinions, did not align with Wikimedia's mission for free content. Please read the FAQ before commenting. Thanks -- Colin (talk) 22:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Перелицовка или ошибка при печати ?

Добрый день!

В 1978 году церковь Иоанна Златоуста в Ярославле выглядела вот так:File:Ярославль в 1978 г. Церковь Иоанна Крестителя (1654 г.).jpg. В этом веке её вид зеркально изменился вот так:File:Church-john-yar.jpg. Является ли это следствием кардинальной перестройки, или же это ошибка при печати? Снимки из космоса говорят в пользу достоверности первого варианта файла.

В любом случае заодно не плохо было бы и перспективные искажения подправить--Витольд Муратов (обс, вклад) 12:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

Я фоткал как было и файл не переделывал. А вот правильную категорию скопипастить опять было оч. трудно, йес... --A.Savin 07:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Да я и сам в догадках терялся, как мог опытный фотограф с дигитальной камерой сделать ошибку, которую можно было лишь при фото-печати сделать. Однако, пол-дня потратил, чтобы все фотографии Коровников в сети сопоставить и всё же решил, что более поздняя картинка - зеркальная. Воистину, глядя на мир нельзя не удивляться. Оно и к лучшему- так веселее жить как-то  :-). --Витольд Муратов (обс, вклад) 12:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Я не зеркалю свои изображения. В девятом году я их ещё вообще не обрабатывал. Впрочем, если не верите - мне тоже пофиг. --A.Savin 15:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Maybe a bit light but nice. --Christian Ferrer 11:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Zimmermann666

Предупредить бы товарища пока не поздно:

• File:Наталья Синдеева.jpg — https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151401966648800.1073741825.324852143799&type=3
• File:Dua's Layer.jpg — http://www.sci-news.com/othersciences/anthropology/article01151-human-eye-duas-layer.html

вот :-) --ze-dan (talk) 09:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:58, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 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 Good quality--Lmbuga 10:54, 22 June 2013 (UTC) I don't believe that it is a bunker, though Poco a poco 10:58, 22 June 2013 (UTC) Yes, probably it's just a pantry or so, to be sure I removed it from category "Bunkers". Thanks --A.Savin 11:26, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 09:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:06, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LipetskOblast Yagodnoe 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Kotfedot

У товарища остались не удалёнными два файла с явно подложной лицензией и авторством:

• File:Ostrovproject.jpg - загружен на commons в июне 2009, но вот эта картинка за январь того же года: http://www.bfm.ru/news/11228?doctype=article (там написано что источник AFP), плюс эта же картинка гуглится в гораздо большем размере.
• File:Fedeisland-map.jpg - загрузка также июнь 2009... а на сайте архитектурного проекта год указан 2008: http://islandfederation.ru/en/areal.html
  --ze-dan (talk) 10:08, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Boys with hoops on Chesnut Street.jpg

Thank you for repairing my edit on that file. At the time, the information underneath the image did not display correctly for me. I checked the history of the templates, and non have been changed since my edit, so I have no explanation for why it did not display correctly for me at the time. Regardless, thank you for fixing it. :) Optimom (talk) 20:39, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 16 Christ Nativity Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 05 Don River.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Podolsk trolley img2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

File:OB from Moskva River 02.jpg

File:OB from Moskva River 02.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has 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 it, 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!

178.10.110.246 16:45, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OB from Moskva River 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rjcastillo 14:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 13 StGeorge Church tower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:44, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 08 wooden house.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 14:44, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 04 Boat as monument.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Bgag 17:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 01 Stadium.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OB from Moskva River 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 18:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Rzd office.jpg

File:Rzd office.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has 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 it, 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!

Stefan4 (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Podolsk trolley img1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo church 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Divovo Station 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Bgag 14:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Podolsk trolley img3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo Oka River 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 composition, nice colours and good quality. -- Felix Koenig 14:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 03 Saint John Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK --Christian Ferrer 11:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC) yes, very nice! --Ralf Roletschek 11:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 10 Tikhvin Cathedral.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 slightly to dark?--ArildV 16:09, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Domodedovo village church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 06 former church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Колин Тодд

Здравствуйте! Я написал письмо в OTRS, что я заранее получил разрешение использовать Файл Colin Todd на этом ресурсе, но его удалили. Почему? --Илья Яковлев (talk) 08:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Помеченные файлы удаляются по истечении семи дней. Если будет подтверждение разрешения от автора - не проблема, будет восстановлено. Почему в OTRS ваш запрос так и не обработали - я не знаю, спросите у кого-нибудь из русскоязычных сотрудников OTRS (напр. Butko или Rubin16). --A.Savin 08:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

У Butko доступа к OTRS уже нет. --Evil Russian (talk) 14:08, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

А к кому надо обращаться? --PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Divovo Station 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --PierreSelim 09:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 09.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 12 StGeorge Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Danke für all deine Beiträge. Steinsplitter (talk) 15:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks ;) --A.Savin 15:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo Oka River 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo Oka River 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

QI statistic

Hi,

mal sehen wann er es merkt und sich wieder rauslöscht. ;) --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Качество изображений

Ну вот, я хотел снова потыкать по ссылкам в Вашем сообщении, а Вы его удалили. Сейчас я просмотрел Вашу страницу и решил поинтересоваться по поводу качества фотографий. Тут на английском есть гайдлайн. Неплохо бы его перевести на русский. По крайней мере, на фоне летних отпусков можно было бы его отрекламировать. Я бы, например, хотел разобраться в параметрах фотографий. — Mfomich (talk) 14:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Ссылки никуда не делись, вон там они. Переводчик из меня хреновый, а насчёт заинтересованности российского (со)общества что-либо у себя дома изменить, у меня иллюзий давно уже нет. Мерси, однако, за интерес к моему троллингу сообщению. --A.Savin 15:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Town crown (Russia, simple, var. 1).svg

Привет! Я тут давно не появлялся, увидел, что удалили рисунок File:Town crown (Russia, simple, var. 1).svg. Насколько я помню, перерисовывал его с герба, которому гораздо больше 100 лет. Посмотри, если не трудно, что там было в описании. --Art-top (talk) 19:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• Точно не уверен, но вроде бы брал отсюда, рисунки 18 века. --Art-top (talk) 19:37, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

DescriptionA.Savin/Archive/2013/1	Русский: Городская корона, элемент российских гербов
Date	24 August 2010
Source	Own work
Author	{{User:Art-top/Info|drawing}} {{Inkscape-hand}}

Category:SVG coat of arms elements - mural crowns

Восстановить? --A.Savin 20:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• Да, если не трудно. --Art-top (talk) 20:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

 Сделано --A.Savin 20:05, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Спасибо! Описание поправил. --Art-top (talk) 20:09, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

User:Azimbaj

Довольно таки вольные представления у участника об авторстве и лицензировании. Большая часть вклада сомнительна:

• File:Marii p3-PNG.PNG - подложная лицензия (хотя сам файл тривиален и может быть PD)
• File:Marii p3.gif - аналогично
• File:Flag of Volzhsk (Mariy El).jpg - аналогично
• File:Coat of Volzhsk (Mariy El).jpg - аналогично
• File:Kraj Mari - nachalo II Millen.JPG - подложная лицензия. Едва ли этому рисунку более 70 лет и автор скончался примерно тогда же.
• File:Mamicz-Berdejym kuczymasz.jpg - картина 2000 года, не видно разрешения на публикацию
• File:Poltysz.jpg - картина 2003 года, также без разрешения
  

вот... --ze-dan (talk) 06:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Несвободные файлы

Приветствую. В статье [5] все файлы с логотипом и копирайтом, загружены, как собственная работа под Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. ИМХО, на удаление просятся. --kosun (talk) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo church 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK --Christian Ferrer 11:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Divovo Station 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK, find the funny cat! --Christian Ferrer 11:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)  Comment Cool cat! I hope it knows the current train schedule. --Dirtsc 11:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 Sign.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Road to Konstantinovo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Steinsplitter 15:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 Beach2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 17:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Badaev Factory Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Sosenka River.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Is this a barn in the trees in the background? If yes, the roof seem very tilted on right and the trees too --Christian Ferrer 11:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC) At least the two masts are tilted. That should be corrected. --Dirtsc 12:14, 15 July 2013 (UTC)  Done Should be OK now --A.Savin 13:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC) It's not easy to take a reference for tilt, so for me it's OK  Support --Christian Ferrer 10:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo church 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --D4m1en 10:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo Oka River 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 11:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lefortovo Goshpital Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Has this image been stitched ? If yes there might be some stitching errors in the cables on the left (I added a note). D4m1en 10:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Nevertheless: Good quality. --Berthold Werner 11:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC) No stitching, the cables are this way --A.Savin 13:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 11 house.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 14:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ryazan 06-13 Dyagilevo Station 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Dankov - 15 Tikhvin Cathedral.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Matnakash bread Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 10:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Дубликаты

Извините, что не пишу в положенное место, но я даже не знаю, является ли это причиной для удаления. Похоже, что File:Sergey Orlovsky3.JPG это просто уменьшенная копия File:Sergey Orlovskiy .jpg. --Yakiv Gluck (talk) 10:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 Beach1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:04, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Presnya Trekhgornaya Factory Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 bit noisy and/or blurred but OK  Support --Christian Ferrer 07:16, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. Little minor CAs (see note), but good IMO--Lmbuga 19:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Ajepbah 11:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo Oka River 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 17:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ryazan 06-13 Dyagilevo Station 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

QIC nominations

OK! Thank you for the notice!--Paris 16 (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Zografou 04 StThomas Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Lmbuga 15:57, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 12 National Garden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. I don't like some flowers because red halo (see note), but the palms are very good--Lmbuga 16:03, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Ajepbah 13:35, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 19:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Kallithea 03 Church Metamorphosi Sotiros.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 19:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Viktor Koksharov IT Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments IMHO you could sharpen a bit. Did you apply red-eye correction? The iris looks a bit strange. --Tuxyso 21:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)  Done New version, without retouche of reflections --A.Savin 22:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC) Looks much better now, especially the non-retouched eyes. --Tuxyso 06:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Isabelle Faust B 09-2012.jpg

Hi A.Savin, I hope my very bad taste comment don't hurt you, this is only tactlessness from mine. I have always like yours pictures, I was admiring on its before buy my first camera. I promise you to try to improve my comments. But for now I need help, I am rewiewing this file in QI File:Torkilstöten July 2013 02.jpg, I find it too much green, and I want to know if it's a sufficiant reason to decline. I ask it to you because you have promote one of my picture which is too bluish. Friendly. --Christian Ferrer 06:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, why should your comment hurt *me*? Maybe the lady on the photo, but I hope she doesn't read it :)

As for me, the photo you're reviewing is OK for QI. The leaves and the grass are green, but the sky is blue, without a visible cast. The level of saturation I find OK, for a landscape shot like that. --A.Savin 08:09, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you're right, me too I hope she doesn't read it. I must be carefull with my comments. Thanks far all. --Christian Ferrer 08:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 View to Filerimos.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 15:45, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 09 Parliament.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments IMO need a very little perspective correction, bulding seem tilted in back --Christian Ferrer 11:58 25 July 2013 (UTC) I applied several tilt corrections already - imo the building should be OK now - can you add a note? --A.Savin 12:07, 25 July 2013 (UTC) OK, I have add note --Christian Ferrer 18:27 25 July 2013 (UTC)  Done I have tilted a very little bit at the sides now, imo no further straightening possible, you're free to decide if you like it or not :) A.Savin 19:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks for corrections and for give me the choice, very good quality  Support --Christian Ferrer 04:49 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 17 Christ Nativity Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support--Christian Ferrer 11:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lefortovo Park shelduck Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 11:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Zografou 01 Papagou.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 11:49, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Phare du Mont-Saint-Clair, Sète, Hérault 05.jpg

Hi A.Savin, You have decline this file in FIC for color temperature and for the wall, I 've tried to correct the both. Could you take a look and say what you think about it? Thanks anyway. Friendly. --Christian Ferrer 11:28, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I've tried a new crop, maybe you will want to oppose because there is a bit of wall --Christian Ferrer 12:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

As I stated before, the tower is non-correctible. It comes from this camera location and is part of the composition. I.e., you may cut it or not, but it will be a compromise anyway. --A.Savin 12:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo church 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Kallithea 02 Church Metamorphosi Sotiros.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 14:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 06 Egyptian Embassy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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  Support --Christian Ferrer 05:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 08 French Embassy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Divovo Station 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 IMO--Lmbuga 17:25, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 Beach3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 The horizon says that the image is a bit tilted (QI for me if correction). Too much sky IMO (rule of thirds), but it's not a big problem for me--Lmbuga 17:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)  Done, tilt corrected, a little bit less sky. --A.Savin 18:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)  Support Good for me--Lmbuga 20:45, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Zografou 03 StGeorge Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Help the Noob :)

Hi! You protected the File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg but only against uploading. Why didn't you pull the other breaks as well? Not complaining! Just a noob question. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 21:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

There was an upload war only. We should use edit protection sparely I think, as it prevents good-faith users from improving categories etc.. --A.Savin 21:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks for your fast reply. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 01:47, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 06 church ruins.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Jastrow 13:51, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 03 Alexandras Avenue trolley.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:54, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 04 Syntagma.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 18:53, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 16 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 10:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Kallithea 01 Metro station.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 IMO--Lmbuga 10:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 01 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:53, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Clarification please...

With regard to your closure of yesterday's thread about User:Arctic Kangaroo. I encouraged him, several times, to take steps to confirm he was a minor, via OTRS. You wrote that he is apparently a minor. So, am I correct to assume your closure is not based on taking his claim of being a minor at face value, but rather on his apparent inability or unwilling to comply with our policies -- ie. incompetency.

Are you aware of AK actually taking any steps to confirm his claim to be a minor? Geo Swan (talk) 07:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

No, neither I have seen him at face, nor know about an OTRS confirmation. But I'm quite sure that AK = minor. --A.Savin 09:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Zografou 05 StTherapont Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--ArildV 12:17, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 05 church ruins.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 18 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 17:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Airport 06-13 DutyFree.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:47, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Zografou 07 StNicholas Chapel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:09, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 13 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. I'm not sure if it's a bit yellow because too much fog--Lmbuga 15:14, 2 August 2013 (UTC)  Comment Really, too much fog --Lmbuga 15:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Sète from Mount Saint-Clair, Hérault 01.jpg

• You have rewiew this file but my english language is limited and I don't understand what you want (crop or not crop?).
• I've also two questions for Featured picture candidates
  • 1. I have withdraw a nomination and I have another picture nominated, must I wait that the picture I have withdraw disappear from the page to nominate an other picture (because there is a maximum of two nominations by user?
  • 2. Just for information, is it possible two Featured pictures for the same subject for exemple this one that is featured : File:Crique de l'Anau, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg and this other that is not featured File:Crique de l'Anau, Sète, Hérault 02.jpg, the second can be, or not? I don't want to bother you with my questions, if I do, you can say it to me, Friendly --Christian Ferrer 18:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

No, that's OK, I want the crop. But when I click on the 100 % view, I still see the old (uncropped) version. --A.Savin 19:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

1) No, you do not have to wait imo. 2) Personally, I think that two pictures with very similar view of the same place should not both become featured, but however, there is no rule afaik (only two versions of the same photo cannot both be featured). --A.Savin 19:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Zografou 02 Mansion.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 13:32, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 02 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

З скриншота

Добрый день. Удалите, пожалуйста, файлы:

File:Лезвие в ночи.JPG

File:Макабро.JPG

File:Роберт Дювал.jpg

так как они не проходят под PD-Italy. --ze-dan (talk) 04:37, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done --A.Savin 08:32, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 13 view.jpg

Hi A.Savin, this file recently QI promoted is a bit tilted on left, I've add note. Friendly --Christian Ferrer 11:30, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done Corrected. --A.Savin 22:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 02 Archaeological Museum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Tuxyso 06:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Spb 06-2012 Palace Embankment various 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Spb 06-2012 Palace Embankment various 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Voycehded2.jpg

Добрый день. Фото сделано в здании Военно-политической академии им. Ленина где-то в 1948 году, автор не известен. В общем спасти при всём желании не получается... --ze-dan (talk) 00:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Question FPC

Hi A.Savin, I've a question for Featured picture candidate: the rules says 'Only two active nominations by the same user'. If I nominate an image of an other user, is these nomination count for me or for the creator? Friendly. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, yes, as far as I know there is a maximum of 2 candidacies per nominator, regardless if he's the creator or not. --A.Savin 08:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Три фотки

Добрый день :-) Контора обанкротилась и сайта теперь нет, но со 146% вероятностью эти три картинки были там (на сайте).

• File:ARCTEL 1.jpg
• File:ARCTEL Office Cheremuchki.jpg
• File:ARCTEL 2.jpg
  Вот. --ze-dan (talk) 03:07, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Kallithea 04 Church Metamorphosi Sotiros.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:14, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 10 Parliament.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 IMO--Lmbuga 00:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 32 National Library.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Lmbuga 23:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 26 Tram.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 20:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 07 church ruins.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 20:19, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 20 View from Acropolis Hill - pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK --Christian Ferrer 12:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 14 View from Acropolis Hill.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, QI for me --Rolf H. 08:56, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 28 Academy of Athens.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. -- Felix Koenig 15:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 07 MFA Greece.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 18:17 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Rolf H. 12:33, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

AK again

Since you closed the discussion about AK I thought I would let you know that he turned around and uploaded the same deleted images to another project. This is being discussed at a commons drama board as well. https://ms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khas:Senarai_imej/Arctic_Kangaroo http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Missing_legal_competence_by_age_-_2.3F --Canoe1967 (talk) 00:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

File:252km BMO rail platform.jpg

File:252km BMO rail platform.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has 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 it, 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!

Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Better Now ?

I improved the picture : File:2013-Fort de la Miotte 07.JPG Bourgeois.A (talk) 11:46, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

QICbot

Hello A.Savin, thanks for reverting the bot. It is still running though ;-). But I'll abort now as I'm getting a ton of errors from the api :-(. --Dschwen (talk) 19:21, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

User:ArtWinery

Участник сам фотографировал и в 40-е года, и в 50-е да и сейчас логотипы компаний самостоятельно рисует (и владеет правами). Плюс к этому рекламный ник (от Артёмовск Вайнери), чем вкупе напрашивается на блокировку с удалением всего вклада. Хотя вот эта фотка - File:Winery caves.jpg - возможно легальна. --ze-dan (talk) 03:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Attica 06-13 Athens 27 Zappeion.jpg

Hi, I've tried to edit and delete manually the CA of this file, if you don't like revert. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Can you say to me, my friend, what do you think of my editing (with lightroom : less clarity, a very little more contrast and paint brush touching for CA)? --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Thanks for correction. Yes, I checked your version and it appears very similar to my latest version. If you, however, mean that there's less CA now, it's OK for me. --A.Savin 20:41, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Ok, I don't want to wait, I've reverted on your version and promoted it, good and nice!! --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Attica 06-13 Athens 28 Academy of Athens.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Attica 06-13 Athens 28 Academy of Athens.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 04 Observation point.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC) ANd QI for me too--الجوكر 11:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 15 View from Acropolis Hill.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodes Kremasti 06-13 Beach4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Piraeus 06 StNicholas Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK --Christian Ferrer 11:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 13 National Garden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 03 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 the best weather, but good quality. Smog? --Smial 13:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC) This smog we usually call „air“ :))~  Support --Аимаина хикари 14:17, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Paleo Faliro 08 war cemetery.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 11:26, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo Oka River 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Paleo Faliro 03 tram at Flisvos.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments * Barrel distortion should be repaired, otherwise very good with natural colours. -- Smial 14:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)  Done --A.Savin 20:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC) * Ok now. --Smial 09:05, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Piraeus 03 Megaron Navtikou.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 OK --Christian Ferrer 11:25, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 15 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 slight reddish tint? --Smial 13:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 33 Monastiraki.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Piraeus 01 Port.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 23:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Stanislav81

Дважды удалял предупреждение об удалении - File:Русофобия в Википедии.png
File:РД-0120(2).jpg и File:РД-0120.png - файлы с подложной лицензией и авторством. --ze-dan (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Paleo Faliro 01 Leoforos Posidonos.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 08:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lefortovo Park Grotto Mos06-13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 08:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 46 View from Lycabettus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 10:23, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 36 View from Lycabettus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 composition. --Pyb 07:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Piraeus 05 StSpyridon Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 09:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 19 View from Acropolis Hill.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments --Xicotencatl 02:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Bf-quadrath.jpg

Hey, why did you revert the new image?! The new image shows the situation today, so please revert your revert! ;-) The new photo is my own, i will change the meta after a revert from your side! Thanks --ScoeBel (talk) 22:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted the picture again. I changed the meta, so that I'm the copyright holder. Don't revert! Thanks --ScoeBel (talk) 22:36, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

See Commons:Overwriting existing files. However, you're free to upload your photo using a new file name. --A.Savin 07:58, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Ottava Rima

Thankyou for your block, and for taking action when people have passed on it so often. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:33, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I tried to help Ottava, but I guess he didn't want it. He simply is unable to edit productively here. I appreciate that block. Ottava's comments at Russavia's decrat page was starting a raging fire and I'm glad it was extinguished. He is closer to having his talk page access revoked than he is being unblocked. It's necessary, albeit unfortunate. --WorldTraveller101  T  C  G  E 23:16, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I noticed your efforts to talk to OR on their talk page. It's really appreciated, thanks --A.Savin 11:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, albeit he continues to blame others, which is unfortunate, since he has great potential to do good works and benefit the project, but instead he continues to do ad hominem attacks toward the community. With all that, I have retracted my offer to help and am allowing him to figure it out in his own solace, for the benefit of others, but I've given him the ability to vent about the community to me in private. Thanks for your help and lets hope for the problems to be solved. --WorldTraveller101  T  C  G  E 21:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi mate, thanks for undoing your closure of the AN/U discussion, but I notice that the comments there you make were done in the capacity of an admin who was limiting disruption to the project, and I don't think there is any Commons editor who would have a problem with that, as it was clearly limiting disruption. But as your comments were in the capacity of using the admin bit, you may wish to consider making some comment in an editorial capacity on the issue at hand, or not. That's completely up to you. Cheers, russavia (talk) 08:52, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 SKA train stop 03 Proastiakos train arriving.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Piraeus 02 Akti Kallimasioti.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 27 Zappeion.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Purple CA on the poles at right --Christian Ferrer 11:24, 15 August 2013 (UTC)  Done --A.Savin 15:52, 15 August 2013 (UTC) Sorry for the waiting period but for now I can't download the latest version --Christian Ferrer 11:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)  Comment Less but always CA, It's a pity because it's a nice image --Christian Ferrer 22:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC)  Done I've tried to reprocess --A.Savin 08:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)  Support Good --Christian Ferrer 18:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Ottava Rima

Special notifications to you too as most recent proposing/enacting editor of a block for the user. I don't have time for thorough research of all evidence of his misdeeds so it seems appropriate for the people in the know to add useful summaries/evidence/context as felt appropriate. --Nemo 10:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ryazan 06-13 Dyagilevo Station 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Support --Rjcastillo 17:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 49 Catholic StDionysius Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --AmaryllisGardener 18:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 47 View from Lycabettus - pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support --Rjcastillo 17:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 48 Lycabettus railway car.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 14 view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Martin Falbisoner 06:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Paleo Faliro 02 tram at SEF.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 quality --AmaryllisGardener 22:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RybnoeDistrict 06-13 Konstantinovo village 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:10, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 30 University.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fixable barrel distorsion imo. Then QI. --JLPC 17:01, 20 August 2013 (UTC)  Done New version --A.Savin 20:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC) Better now. --JLPC 20:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 24 Arch of Hadrian.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Christian Ferrer 20:39, 22 August 2013 (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:Christ Nativity Church SPB.jpg

Yours sincerely, A.Savin 12:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Просьба

Доброго времени суток! Не могли бы Вы защитить мою страницу обсуждения от троллей? C уважением, — Stas1995 (talk) 17:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done, пока на 1 месяц, если нужно будет продление или снятие защиты - обращайтесь. --A.Savin 17:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Большое спасибо! C уважением, — Stas1995 (talk) 17:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 16 View from Acropolis Hill.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:34, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Piraeus 08 Port.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Julian Herzog 13:16, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 25 Olympian Zeus Temple.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 12:54, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dankov - 07 city signs.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 22 View from Acropolis Hill - Museum of Ancient Agora.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 40 View from Lycabettus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:04, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Paleo Faliro 04 beach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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  Support --Rjcastillo 16:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 05 Syntagma.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and nice sharpening --Christian Ferrer 06:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Помощь

Здравствуйте!

File:Станция Ростов (ныне Ростов-Ярославский).jpg

Я все правильно указал? Как насчет указания автора? Мне неизвестно об авторе. Спасибо.

Александр Коновалов (talk) 23:34, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done исправил --A.Savin 09:11, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Hills of Hymettus 08 church ruins.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 photo. -- Spurzem 11:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 SKA train stop 02 view to Parnitha.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 18 View from Acropolis Hill.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mattbuck 09:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

FP of people, name and bots

Здравствуй! I'd like to ask you two things about bots, because you are an admin:

• I've noticed there wasn't a category for all our Featured pictures of people, so I have created it. I'd like to add all images in this gallery to the category and I wanted to ask you if any bot can do it, because one by one can become eternal.
• I'm planning to add my real name to all my pictures to make attribution easier for external use. Which is the best way to do it? A template like Poco a poco's or Luc Viatour's? Or can my nickname be changed on the summary's information box, like Luc Viatour also does? Could that be done by a bot to my pictures? (they're all together in a category).

Большое спасибо! --Kadellar (talk) 17:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi colleague,

unfortunately I cannot help regarding the bots. I don't have a bot and neither do I know how to create + to maintain one. You may ask an acive bot operator, like Dschwen or Pleclown.

Same for the template. I have one myself (User:A.Savin/Photo), but most of my old uploads still don't have it included and I have neither a bot nor time and desire to put it to far more than 3.000 images. --A.Savin 18:51, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thank you very much for the information. I have asked Dschwen, if he can't do it because he might be doing other tasks I'm sure he will know the right person. Thanks!! --Kadellar (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 34 Filellinon Russian Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 16:01, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 35 Parthenon.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 13:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Attica 06-13 Athens 45 View from Lycabettus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Xicotencatl 17:04, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Мастер-классы

17 июля 2013 года на форуме вы предлагали устраивать мастер-классы. Я обязательно приму участие в вашем вики-мастер-классе, поэтому прошу вас, предупредите меня на странице обсуждения. Спасибо.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Attica 06-13 Athens 25 Olympian Zeus Temple.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Attica 06-13 Athens 25 Olympian Zeus Temple.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 20:03, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I have a little problem

I have a little problem with that is this image: featured, featured, featured, featured. But I do not have the label in the caption. How should I do? Thank you for your advice. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:31, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Sadly I cannot help, see User_talk:Daniel78#What's_up_with_FPCbot??. In extreme case, someone should process it by hand --A.Savin 08:03, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok thanks --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:12, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

It work now. Thank you for what you did. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:17, 1 September 2013 (UTC)