User talk:Alvesgaspar/archive20

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2011-06-27. Nasas na praia de Louro- Muros.jpg[edit]

Espero explicações--Miguel Bugallo 01:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hi There

I am from an ad agency in Australia. We would like to purchase your chicken running picture as roiyalty free. Is this available for purchase and if so, how much. My email address is nburrows@bcm.om.au

Thanks

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seagull June 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Not "pin-sharp" but good. I like the composition.--Jebulon 23:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Featured pictures of Lisbon[edit]

Hello. This new category is to fit in Category:Featured pictures by city, where all the cities of the world with around ten or more than ten featured pictures each have their own category. There are not a lot of them, so I think it is important to have a complete list. Lisbon and Porto Covo should not be an exception. At least, that's what I think. Thierry Caro (talk) 12:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo pano June 2011-2b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 00:51, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seagull June 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Comment QI to me, but I'm not sure--Lmbuga 02:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


File tagging File:Paris July 2011-2.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Paris July 2011-2.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Don-kun (talk) 16:50, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paris_July_2011-2.jpg[edit]

File:Paris_July_2011-2.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 19:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Alvesgaspar!
Tip: Add categories to your files
Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:41, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-4a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 23:56, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-1a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 15:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-2a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments FP ? Welcome back !--Jebulon 14:30, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-10a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. Just the metadata could be better (inaccurate file name, no geocode, I had to correct a typo.) --H005 22:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC) "Tour EifFel", with 2 "ff". Geocode added (that's because I know the place Clin)--Jebulon 22:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
good picture, but please remove first the "ghost-bus" --Taxiarchos228 06:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)} -- ✓ Done -- Thank you, Jebulon and Tachiarchos! Alvesgaspar 08:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Coreopsis July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good. Suitable category added.--Jebulon 22:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gaillardia July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments I hate bugs, but besides that it's an extraordinarily pleasing photo. Airwolf 23:32, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coreopsis July 2011-3.jpg[edit]

Hi Alvesgaspar; I could still see an artifact in File:Coreopsis July 2011-3.jpg, so I used the magic wand tool (Photoshop) to select the area, the scratch removal tool to blur the linear artifact, and the gradient tool to darken the corner. If you don't like the result, just revert it. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-7a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 18:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

L'Arc de Triomphe[edit]

L’Arc de Triomphe est un monument que je connais ou... que je crois connaitre. Car systématiquement je reste planté et fasciné par le « Départ » et je m’aperçois, grâce à toi, que j’ai dénigré les 3 autres. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Permission[edit]

Hello.

I have written a book for children about animals that I want to publish. In searching for photographic images, I have found your pictures that is very beautiful and fit the storyline that I want to convey. I will appreciate it if you will give me permission to use these photo's in my book. Below are the animals that will represents your photo's. I will also include all info that will accompany the acknowledgements.

I will acknowledge your work - Beneath the photo and at the end of the book, your information. I ask that if you agree, to kindly send me your Name and appropriate information as you wish it to be published.

Photographer: Joaquim Alves Gaspar. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mantid_August_2007-2.jpg Praying Mantis. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bumblebee_October_2007-3.jpg Honey Bee

Thank you very much. Louise - zandtree@yahoo.com

  • Please feel free to use those two pictures in the terms you mention. But please notice that the second insect is not a "Honey bee" but a "Bumblebee". They belong to the same big family of the Apidae but are very different creatures. Bumblebees don't produce honey!-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-11a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Tight crop but I think it meets the criteria.--MrPanyGoff 09:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-35b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 composition --Archaeodontosaurus 05:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Echinops July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support QI & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 13:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moscow_July_2011-38a.jpg[edit]

File:Moscow_July_2011-38a.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

80.187.106.46 17:15, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nelumbo July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Raghith 08:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-37a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good composition and maybe the best weather for taking the photo. --Don-kun 16:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Coreopsis July 2011-3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Opéra de Paris[edit]

J'ai mis une note sur ta photo de l'opéra. Ce n'est pas une plaisanterie. Par contre je ne suis pas très sûr de mon anglais si tu voulais la laisser. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-21b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Great informative panorama. I would prefer more view in the bottom and more sharpness but anyway, it meets the criteria for QI, imo.--MrPanyGoff 09:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-22a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Valuable view. Could be sharper but anyway I think good enough for QI.--MrPanyGoff 09:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Eryngium July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Carschten 13:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Images Set Promotion[edit]

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: The main sculptures of the Arc du Triomphe, Paris.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
The main sculptures of the Arc du Triomphe, Paris.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

--George Chernilevsky talk 12:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-34a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:31, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Moscow July 2011-4a.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Moscow July 2011-4a.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Caesalpinia July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support QI & Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 20:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cynara July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good picture. --Gzzz 19:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The right orthograph in latin is Cynara scolymus and not scolimus --Gzzz 19:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Coreopsis July 2011-2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Coreopsis July 2011-2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-11a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good, I like --Butterfly austral 23:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-6a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 07:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-38a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Just a pity it will soon be deleted - stupid Russian law! --H005 20:41, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Nelumbo July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support QI for me --Archaeodontosaurus 08:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-16.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 I think it meets the criteria.--MrPanyGoff 09:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moscow_July_2011-37a.jpg[edit]

File:Moscow_July_2011-37a.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

79.237.182.28 23:06, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2011-6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 07:15, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-35.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 06:08, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paris July 2011-27a.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-27a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 for me--Lmbuga 23:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-30.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments can not see the dust spot, but even with it QI --Taxiarchos228 09:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-3c.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good--Lmbuga 09:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-26a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support QI for me --Archaeodontosaurus 05:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Agave July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. Bit tight on the right and file name could be more descriptive of content. --Elekhh 00:28, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ipomoea purpurea en VI[edit]

J'ai un doute sur la détermination, je crains que tu ne sois victime du jardiner du Muséum. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vague en FP[edit]

Bonjour mon ami,

Je veux être le premier à te féliciter pour la promotion en FP de ton "saut de vague", c'est vraiment une très belle image, très réussie. On a l'impression que le personnage veut marcher sur l'eau ! Et 20/0, c'est un beau score, comme pour un match de volley-ball ! ;)
J'ai bien reçu ton mail, je suis content que le livre te plaise et te soit utile, tiens moi au courant !
Amitiés, --Jebulon (talk) 09:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merci bien de tes compliments, Jebulon! But the truth is I didn't believe much in the success of the photo in FPC. That is why I called the nomination 'a joke'. It is, of course, a "lucky shot" and one could take hundreds of them before getting a similar result. Yes, it is nice to have such an unanimous result. But I'm not the only one, there is some gentleman from German who has presented recently gorgeous panoramas! and another user from Tanzania who shot one of the most beautiful animal portraits to date in FPC! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Porto Covo July 2011-1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porto Covo July 2011-1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good.--Ankara 09:55, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2011-29.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments I like the picture, mainly thanks to the three people in the water. They make the image and composition interesting. --Ankara 10:20, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2011-32.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI to me. Geolocation and a description of the equipment you used would be interesting, too. --D4m1en 14:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -- ✓ Done -- Alvesgaspar 17:20, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-33.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI to me. There is a very small oddity I found and marked with a note : a stitching border caused a 3-wheeled car. Panoramas with moving objects are such a nightmare. --D4m1en 13:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC) -- ✓ Done - Thank you for letting me know about the horrible stitching error! -- Alvesgaspar 16:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Caesalpinia gilliesii (Bird of Paradise), flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Centaurea sphaerocephala, flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Coreopsis grandiflora, flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Echinops ritro (Globe thistle).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Eryngium amethystinum (Amethyst Sea Holly).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Freesia alba, flowers and buds.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ipomoea tricolor.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ludwigia grandiflora (Primrose willow), flower and leaves.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Trifolium montanum.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Moscow church[edit]

Why cant I use the email user? You have me blocked? You know I cannot be nice to you in public!

I would saturate the wall colors with photoshop levels, maybe a little burning in. Maybe a polarizing filter would have helped. Just a friendly comment... nice shot. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:52, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • For some reason, probably a clumsy change by myself, the email from other users was not enabled. It is fixed now. Yes, the aesthetics of the image would benefit from an increase in the saturation, especially of the washed out colors of the fresco paintings. But I feel some scruples in exagerating when the subject is historical (in spite of what I say in my profile about the interpretation of reality bla bla). Thanks for the friendly suggestion anyway. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:36, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2011-4b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Raghith 09:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Moscow July 2011-34a.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Moscow July 2011-34a.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:08, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Moscow_July_2011-edit_by_Böhringer.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Moscow July 2011-3c.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:09, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-39a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 06:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2011-34.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 06:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paris_July_2011-27a.jpg[edit]

File:Paris_July_2011-27a.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

195.169.141.54 15:15, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2011-30a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Silybum March 2008-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good. --Quartl 06:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-24.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-28a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI to me. The people is not disturbing to me, but I would like that the shoes of the pedestrian were complete--Lmbuga 11:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Alcea July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Nice parisian flower --Jebulon 16:53, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Morning glory September 2007-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Oh yes.--Jebulon 16:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hoverfly May 2008-6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me--Holleday 20:29, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pollenia June 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me--Holleday 20:29, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hoverfly July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Someone35 17:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Flower July 2011-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 09:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Flower July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 09:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Paris July 2011-41.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Someone35 17:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Campanula July 2011-1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Someone35 12:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-49.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 the red building in the middle looks cool. --Someone35 13:47, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-48.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Someone35 13:47, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Flower July 2011-3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Someone35 16:38, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-13a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-10a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Boom! --Airwolf 08:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Picture[edit]

Obrigada pelas boas vindas, e também pelas considerações.
Efectivamente tenho aprendido bastante com os comentários negativos, pois fala de coisas em que não tinha reparado. Gosto muito de fotografia, mas como nunca aprendi com ninguém, os pormenores técnicos fogem-me, mas acho que vou aprender muito aqui. Ás vezes vejo fotografias que não gosto mesmo nada, mas não ponho voto porque não sei explicar a razão por palavras, talvez melhore com o tempo. Vou seguir o conselho e tentar não ser impulsiva a avaliar uma fotografia só porque gosto do tema.--Celia Ascenso (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

Involuntary vacation[edit]

Hi Joaquim,

It was nice of you to assume that I am back. It makes me smile to get such a reaction when I drop by to make just a single silly comment. Unfortunately, I am not back as a contributor at this time. This summer my DSLR and 200 mm lens suffered a fatal accident, which shattered the lens and resulted in a camera body, which is completely out of order. Also, we are in the process of reworking a majority of the rooms in our house including the roof, which is taking a lot of resources (both economically and timewise). Maybe, when the dust settles (literally, there is a lot of dust on the keyboard I am writing on), I can get back to Commons. Till then, enjoy! Best wishes, --Slaunger (talk) 20:10, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP quality advice[edit]

Hey Alvesgaspar, I was wanting to get your opinion on whether you think the following are FP candidates:

  • This is gold from the sunlight
    This is gold from the sunlight
  • This was shot from the ground, with the aircraft flying overhead at 11,000 metres (read description)
    This was shot from the ground, with the aircraft flying overhead at 11,000 metres (read description)

The photographer will be providing them to me in much higher resolution (prob max resolution), so they will meet that criteria before too long. Anyway, am interested in what you think. Cheers, russavia (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Russavia, thank you for asking my advice. I'm afraid none of the pictures have a real chance of promotion. The problem of almost all is the tight crop, much affecting the composition (which is one of the most important components of a FP). Size is also an issue, with pictures 1 and 5 below FP requirement. The best are probably 2 and 3 but, again, the extreme crop makes them poor candidates, even for QI. Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alvesgaspar/archive20&oldid=61867708"