User talk:Alvesgaspar/archive26

Most valued status of misidentified image File:Trifolium April 2010-2.jpg

Hi Alvesgaspar/archive26, thanks for checking my edits regarding your photograph. Your latest edit on en:Clover is alright with me. There is one major problem remaining, though. Your photograph is still the most valued photograph for Trifolium repens, even though the subject is a different clover species. This might be very misleading to editors looking for a good image of Trifolium repens. I am thinking about opening a review of the "most valued" status, which is probably the only way to do this. Am I right or how can this problem be corrected? Best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
By the way: I just changed the ID of File:Trifolium April 2010-3.jpg as well because this seems to be the same plant. I am still thinking about the third image File:Trifolium April 2010-4.jpg, which might show a species different from the other two images, even though I am not sure, whether the ID of this is correct. In my area flower heads with so many magenta flowers are rather rare and atypical, even though this might not be impossible. And Portugal is far away from Germany. Best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 21:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for your expertise and help! Yes, it is good idea to open a review in VIC. This reminds me that I still have a couple of other misidentified species which are VI... A Happy New Year from Portugal! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and also a Happy New Year to you from Germany! I nominated your picture and two alternatives with correct ID for review. I only hope that I did everything the right way. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 22:35, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Waves December 2012-1.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 Nice! --Moroder 11:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica December 2012-3a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 well --Rjcastillo 23:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica December 2012-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica December 2012-1.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 --Iifar 20:07, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SMP December 2012-5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 nice composition too -- MJJR 09:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SMP December 2012-6b.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 13:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SMP December 2012-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SMP December 2012-3.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 Very good --Rjcastillo 19:19, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SMP December 2012-1.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  Comment remove dust spot. See notes --Rjcastillo 19:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC) --  Done Alvesgaspar 21:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC) Comment VEry good --Rjcastillo 15:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica December 2012-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris July 2011-43.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 19:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Capuchos December 2012-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 15:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SMP December 2012-8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 22:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Caparica December 2012-4.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Caparica December 2012-4.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-10.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 17:34, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality --Llez 06:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-6.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 --Llez 06:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-2.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. --JLPC 15:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-1.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 and composition. --Fletcher6 23:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good now. --Cayambe 20:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 17:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coimbra December 2011-11.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 Nice. --Mattbuck 07:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment Please add information to the file description or parent category regarding the year of construction and architect if known. cmadler (talk) 15:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 10:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

POTY 2012

Olá Alves Gaspar :D

Antes de tudo tenho que dizer que o POTY seria um lugar muito mais triste e sombrio sem as tuas imagens :D Quando eu "crescer" quero tirar fotos como tu! :D

Então, tinhas razão, tanta razão que movi a tua imagem e mais nove como podes ver aqui. Se tiveres tempo, podias passar nas outras galerias e dar uma olhada tb? Estamos exactamente na época de verificar as imagens para termos certeza que estão todas nas categorias certas.

Obrigada pelo aviso, Béria Lima ^msg 13:50, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support : best in scope. --JLPC (talk) 09:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose Because Belgium does not have Freedom of Panorama, it is necessary to know the architect and year of construction to verify that copyright status. cmadler (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
• I don't agree. The only interesting buildings in this photo, those to which any copyright might apply, are obviously older than 75 years. Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Building age, especially when it's only "older than 75 years" is not relevant. Belgian copyright duration is 70 years pma, so if the architect was still alive in 1943, then the building remains copyrighted. Additionally, if it was constructed since 1/1/1923, and if it was still copyrighted in Belgium on 1/1/1996, it has a US copyright until at least 1/1/2019. cmadler (talk) 14:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Support No problem for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 08:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Sint-Niklaas April 2012-1.jpg

File:Sint-Niklaas April 2012-1.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!

cmadler (talk) 15:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-3.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 At least one dust spot needs fixing. Mattbuck 16:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC) --  Done -- Alvesgaspar 23:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC) Good. Mattbuck 00:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment The scope is Graslei Street, but the main subject of this image is a canal. Could you explain? Yann (talk) 15:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
• You are right, I have adjusted the scope to "Graslei", which is the generic name of this historical part of the city (could be "Graslei harbor" as well). -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Best in scope. Yann (talk) 08:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Meets all criteria. cmadler (talk) 15:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 11:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

POTY 2012 - parte 2

Oh, isso é porque os 3 primeiros dias é para corrigir bugs que por acaso apareçam. Hoje a meia noite começa a "propaganda de verdade" com o central notice nas wikis, post no blog da WMF, e aviso na PP do commons e nas Esplanadas das wikis :D Béria Lima ^msg 19:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

PS: Eu estou a ler um livro sobre fotografia e rezando para ter uma camera nova para ver se ano que vem um dos candidatos é uma foto feita por mim, e não somente nomeada, se isso acontecer, minha meta é bater as tuas 80 FP ;) :D

Já são 90? Bah, vou ter que fazer milagres para chegar perto disso :D Béria Lima ^msg 19:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

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 08:37, 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! Flowers Brussels April 2012-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alcochete 2013-4.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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica January 2013-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 22:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica January 2013-1.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. --JLPC 19:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica January 2013-2.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. --MB-one 21:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Good but : You forgot the geocoding.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Done Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Godot13 (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zinnia July 2010-1.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 --Rjcastillo 01:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo October 2012-3.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. --Moonik 15:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Papaver April 2010-3.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 --Rjcastillo 22:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Papaver March 2010-4.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 Ok --Poco a poco 23:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nelumbo 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 Good Quality --Rjcastillo 22:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cat poster 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 Please, remember add note foreach subpicture in Identification process --The Photographer 05:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Asteracea poster.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Could I nominate this picture to FP? --The Photographer 16:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC) -- Thank you The Photographer, but a better version is already a FP! -- Alvesgaspar 18:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment This is actually the best image. For the scope should add "exterio" because it can be visited.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. cmadler (talk) 14:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-50.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 18:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Paris July 2011-27a.jpg

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

review

 Comment Good but : You forgot the geocoding. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

•  Done Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose I see the palace and the pyramid, but I don't see the "cour". I think a picture like this one (Cour Carrée) will be better for this scope.--Paris 16 (talk) 15:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
  • The Cour Carrée is different from the Cour Napoléon. Yann (talk) 07:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
•  SupportUnfortunately, the map used in most articles doesn't name the courts. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:45, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo July 2009-1a.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 Very nice.--ArildV 11:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo November 2010-2a.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 QI of course --The Photographer 14:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dipsacus August 2012-1.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 --Rjcastillo 01:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Damselfly July 2009-1.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 --Rjcastillo 01:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grasshopper November 2008-3.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 Great shot.Very good --Rjcastillo 01:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Caparica January 2013-1a.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Caparica January 2013-1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lantana May 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 quality. --Poco a poco 18:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flower March 2008-12.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. --A.Savin 11:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eristalinus September 2007-4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JDP90 18:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ficus November 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 photo -- George Chernilevsky 06:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dipsacus August 2012-2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good! -- George Chernilevsky 06:47, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Old Man

Hello!

I am new to using Wikimedia Commons, so I apologise if I am using the talk page inappropriately!

My husband (G Hesby) wrote an e-book called "The Old Man". Unfortunately, he had a stroke in September and I am therefore trying to publish it via Amazon Kindle on his behalf, but I have never done this before so am on a steep learning curve. I would very much like to use your beautiful picture of the old man in the tunnel as the front cover, but wanted to ask your permission before doing so - I have read the Commons License but it didn't all make sense, so I thought it would be best to check direct, as I wouldn't want to do anything wrong!

Of course, I would acknowledge and attribute your work in the title pages.

I look forward to hearing from you!

Kind regards

Helen

Hi Helen,

Please go ahead, it will be a pleasure and an honor to see that old photo in the front cover of a book! All you have to do is to give the proper credit in the form "Joaquim Alves Gaspar, Wikimedia Commons". I wish you all the best with the book, Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sonchus February 2008-2.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 OK. --Mattbuck 13:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

New gear

Congrats on your new camera! As far as I can see, there are now two proud D800E owners on Commons. I still have to learn how to use mine, but with a tripod, a good lens, and careful focus the result is really impressive. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Chére Marie-Lan, c'est une surprise pour moi de savoir que nous sommes les seules ici à avoir une Nikon 800e! Tu crois que c'est une responsabilité trôp lourde pour nous?... Maintenant j'ai encore l'éxcuse de ne pas avoir des objectives du même niveau... Salut! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:31, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Je connais plusieurs propriétaires de D800 ici, mais le D800E est plus rare. Il me reste moi aussi à avoir des objectifs au niveau ! Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Mais vous êtes, peut-être, trôp modeste? FPC and MOP are waiting for you (I willl be ruthless, btw)! Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 02:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-3.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 --Rjcastillo 02:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-2.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 OK. --Christian Ferrer 06:32, 4February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-1.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 OK. --Christian Ferrer 06:32, 4February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fly June 2009-1a.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 OK. --Christian Ferrer 19:21, 03 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-6.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. --Poco a poco 20:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-4.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  Support Good quality. --Jkadavoor 08:50, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bee October 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  Comment Not sure this is quite right. Mattbuck 07:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)  Support Good quality. I didn't understand Mattbuck's comment. --Jkadavoor 09:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caparica January 2013-5a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 15:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galactites February 2013-1.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. --Bgag 23:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coleostephus February 2013-2.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 --Poco a poco 00:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-51.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 08:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-12.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 Excellent. --Mattbuck 11:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nazaré February 2013-8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 11:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Uploading Gallica

Salut mon cher ami de Porto-Covo !

Just a short one:

J'ai essayé la "capture d'écran" pour télécharger des images de Gallica en haute résolution. Je suis un imbécile de ne pas y avoir pensé plus tôt !

It works very well ! ça marche très bien !!

Comme on dit en français: merci du tuyau !

again: Many thanks for the hint !

Ton ami, --Jebulon (talk) 18:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

PS, Mme Jebulon te salue.

• Salut Jebulon,

Ne t'en fait pas, je me sens très souvent un idiot dans mon travail parce-que je ne m'aperçois pas d'une solution plus simple qui est juste en face du nez! Ça nous arrive quand nous sommes trop concentrés dans les détailles d'un travail et nous ne sommes pas capables de nous eloigner pour voir 'toute le forêt'. Mes compliments aussi à Madamme Jebulon! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galactites February 2013-2.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. --JDP90 17:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aveiro March 2012-6.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 Well done, nice details, maybe dust spots in window glass. --The Photographer 03:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Good but It would be useful to add "exterior".--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Godot13 (talk) 06:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coleostephus February 2013-3.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 Excellent. --Mattbuck 23:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coleostephus February 2013-1.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 Very good. --Mattbuck 23:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-54.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 16:03, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow July 2011-52.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 16:03, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Kudos

Kudos for the brave reviews at COM:FPC! JKadavoor Jee 16:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you Jee, but that was my normal style when I contributed more regularly to FPC. Please see here -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

• I think now you understand what I mean by brave reviews. JKadavoor Jee 09:03, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Leptaxis erubescens 01.JPG

I understand the discussion and I definitely get your point (and I partly agree). But not with Maybe it is time to innovate. I dont think we should encourage any photographer to prioritize innovation and artistic values at the expense of educational values​​. FP is not a very important parts of the big projects that Wikimedia Commons is part of, building a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. Best regards, --ArildV (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

• Originality and consistence are two faces of the same Commons' coin and we certainly need both. I would say that while the first is mostly associated with FPC, the second is the main attribute of QIC and VIC. I fully agree with you that FPC is not the center of Commons! But it is an important part of its salt. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo February 2013-2.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. --Bgag 19:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Freesia February 2013-1.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. --JLPC 19:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eiffel Tower lights the Paris sky.jpg

Hi Joaquim,
I've changed the reason for the FPX on this one. Apparently lights are not always copyrighted on Effel Tower these days, but the file is far to small anyway.
Cheers
Hans

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coccinella February 2013-1.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 Some CA, and DoF problem but, for macro is ok, I think so --The Photographer 19:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Freesia February 2013-3.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 Need some ++E, and sharpening but Ok for me --The Photographer 19:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo February 2013-1a.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 Good quality. But... did you use a tripod? --Moroder 12:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Porto Covo February 2013-4.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 I can not open this image for review, is too large, XD. Remember panorama template and geotag --The Photographer 12:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)  Done -- Roi.dagobert 14:50, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Good quality and useful. --Moroder 12:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ericeira March 2013-6a.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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:10, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ericeira March 2013-3.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. --JLPC 18:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Boots March 2013-1.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. --Moroder 17:47, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Buxus July 2011-1.jpg

Nous avons un problème avec cette image que tu as prise à Paris, c'est un rosier et non un buis. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)