User talk:Andrey Korzun/Archive3

По поводу QI

Здравствуйте. Я заметил, что вы некоторые из ваших фотографий выставляете в качественные. Это хорошо. Качественных изображений из России (не только из Москвы) должно быть побольше. Конкретно по изображению File:Prechistenskie Vorota Square in the evening 01.jpg я должен сказать, что я не могу его поддержать в QI. Когда выставляешь туда файл, необходимо (это я по многократному опыту знаю) проверять его качество в стопроцентном масштабе. Ваш файл очень нерезок, имеется много шума, что при ISO-1000 неудивительно. Я понимаю, что при слабом вечернем свете труднее найти компромис, но всё же это возможно. Всегда нужно делать несколько снимков того же мотива (если, конечно, мотив никуда не убежит, что в данном случае очевидно), и на месте проверять резкость и освещение, т.е. рассматривать на дисплее камеры снимок в 100% и обращать внимание, нет ли пересвеченных мест в кадре, и отсеивать заведомо неудачные кадры. Если такие проблемы есть, то их никаким фотошопом в достаточной мере уже не устранишь. Что касается обработки фотографий, то обязательно (!) нужно снимать все фотографии как в JPEG, так и в RAW-формате. Обрабатывать RAW можно и в бесплатном конвертере, который всегда прилагается к камере. Вот увидите, что это по-любому даёт лучшие результаты, чем JPG, получившийся в результате автоматической конвертации камерой. Если у вас есть вопросы, буду рад помочь. --A.Savin 17:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Большое спасибо за советы и критику. Я только начал осваивать новую камеру, приобрёл год назад, но вплотную начал заниматься ей недавно. Множество режимов, настроек и возможностей иногда ставят в тупик. RAW-формат ещё не пробовал использовать, он меня всегда настораживал огромными размерами файлов и необходимостью дополнительных обработок. А если снимать просто RAW (у Никона это почему-то называется NEF)? --Andrey Korzun (talk) 19:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

RAW - это просто общее название сырого формата цифровывх камер, у Никона это формат NEF, у Кэнон - CR2, и др. Не суть важно. В наше время можно довольно дёшево приобрести и флешку на 16 гб и более, так что размер сырых файлов по идее уже не проблема. А надо ли снимать только в RAW, или настроить камеру так, чтобы параллельно генерировала и JPEG - это уже дело вашего личного предпочтения. Я снимаю на RAW и JPEG одновременно. RAW мне нужен, чтобы файлы обрабатывать, а JPEG - для первичного просмотра и отбора на компьютере материала, который имеет смысл сохранять и обрабатывать (это удобнее делать с файлами JPEG). Сгенерированные камерой JPEG'и я по окончании отбора за ненадобностью удаляю. Самое главное - чтобы был RAW файл, иначе фотография почти наверняка потеряна для QI. --A.Savin 19:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Если места на флешке мало, то знайте: JPEG зашит внутрь любого raw файла, его можно оттуда вытащить. Сгенерированный камерой JPEG очень полезен, чтобы увидеть, насколько лучше вы сделали снимок при обработке raw. Никакие слова не стимулируют так, как это сравнение! --PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Ну, а кроме того, съёмка в raw позволяет не переживать о балансе белого и о точной экспозиции, потому что прощает ошибку на одну ступень. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

A.Savin, PereslavlFoto огромное вам спасибо, вы меня убедили, и теперь как выберусь в фотопоход в следующий раз, обязательно испытаю RAW. Вообще Никон 5200 выбирал в том числе и потому, что у него «малошумная» матрица на высоких ISO среди своей категории. Так по крайней мере о нём писали. Но получается, высокие ISO вообще не оставляют шансов сделать качественный снимок? Я честно говоря не предполагал, что в QI так ужесточились требования. Несколько лет назад выставлял на QI фотографии сделанные на маленький Canon PowerShot S3 IS, и многие получали положительные отзывы. Вот думал было выдвинуть ещё два фото File:Church of the Transfiguration - Cathedral of Christ the Savior 01.JPG и File:Church of the Transfiguration - Cathedral of Christ the Savior 02.JPG — может быть у них есть шанс? @A.Savin: ? --Andrey Korzun (talk) 20:24, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Если честно, мне вообще никогда не приходилось применять такие высокие значения ISO (более 800 не припомню). По опыту могу сказать, что значения 400 и ниже вполне сохраняют шансы на качественное изображение. Иногда при слабом освещении можно применять светосильный объектив. Вот один из собственных примеров: F/2.8 при ISO-320. Качество, конечно, не бог весть какое, но вполне сойдёт для съёмки "с руки" после заката. А с храмом Христа Спасителя у вас, к сожалению, такие же проблемы, как и с площадью. Учтите, правда, что я - пользователь Canon, конкретно по поводу вашей камеры ничего сказать не могу. --A.Savin 20:46, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Это всё философия. Что такое «качественный снимок»? Вам решать на свой вкус. До цифровых камер делали очень качественные снимки, между прочим. Через пять лет вы скажете, что сейчас снимали так себе. Поэтому давайте уходить от этой философии на задачи.

Высокие ISO помогают сделать удачный снимок, однако в нём будет меньше сюжета и больше шума. Мне довелось снимать на несколько камер, и я сделал вывод, что на кропе можно снимать на 200, а на полном кадре даже на 400, и шума не видно или можно убрать дочиста. А вот выше шум или виден, или его убрать нельзя. Поэтому я купил штатив и снимаю на ISO 100, редко ISO 200. Но у вас же свои задачи.

Почитайте, пожалуйста, про чувствительность целую (100, 200, 400...) и дробную (320, 1000...), про усиление и умножение. Далеко не всякая чувстительность хороша. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

А вот от этой фотки: File:2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 01.jpg, у вас есть RAW файл? Если да, то вы можете переслать его мне для дальнейшей обработки, так как я думаю, что из него можно выжать значительно больше, чем есть сейчас. Но в основном, чтобы вам продемонстрировать, как было «до» и как стало «после», в дополнение к тому, что выше уже было сказано. --A.Savin 00:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

ОК, куда прислать? --Andrey Korzun (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Выслал адрес по википочте. --A.Savin 23:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

A.Savin, я отправил вам письмо с файлом месяц назад... --Andrey Korzun (talk) 12:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Я никакого письма от вас не получал. --A.Savin 13:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Странно. Письмо было успешно отправлено по указанному вами адресу. Переслал повторно. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 13:18, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Товарищ Савин, прошу вас заодно написать и процедуру обработки, чтобы мы все могли поучиться. Спасибо. Я так на ходу вижу там только неточный баланс (всё жёлтое), однако я не разглядывал. --PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Баланс вполне адекватен времени съёмки (7 часов вечера). Я мог бы скорректировать его, но после некоторых раздумий не стал, чтобы не пропал этот ноанс. Два других кадра File:2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 03.jpg и File:2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 04.jpg я немного исправлял цвета, поскольку здесь другие задачи и соответственно другие акценты. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 22:12, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sadovnichesky Bridge at night 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Needs perspective correction / нужна коррекция перспективы. --A.Savin 09:25, 19 July 2015 (UTC) Done --Andrey Korzun 12:22, 19 July 2015 (UTC) OK --A.Savin 21:39, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral of Christ the Saviour and Patriarshy bridge at night 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Xicotencatl 19:04, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Baked apple 02.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Bolshaya Sadovaya Street 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pigit's Apartment House at night 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Satire Theatre 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Isiwal 07:32, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Apple marmalade 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Vengolis 03:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Bolshoy Moskvoretsky Bridge 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 19:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Satire Theatre 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moscow Kremlin and Bolshoy Kamenny Bridge late evening 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 11:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Открытки с оригинальными марками

Здравствуйте, Андрей! Не подскажете, где вы брали английские названия для файлов с открытками с оригинальными марками СССР? У меня есть сканы первых трех открыток. И вообще сканы 600 dpi первых нескольких десятков открыток. Не возражаете, если я перезалью ваши файлы и добавлю png-формат? --Matsievsky (talk) 18:53, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Вообще-то все мои сканы ПКсОМ со спецгашениями. Встречаются редкие СГ. Или у вас тоже сканы карточек со СГ? --Andrey Korzun (talk) 22:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

В 1972 г. Category:1972 postal cards with commemorative stamp of the Soviet Union из 5 сканов только 1 со спецгашением. Пока мои сканы без спецгашений. Конечно, буду внимательно разбираться со спецгашениями. Каталог Максименко скачал с Твирпикса. --Matsievsky (talk) 22:28, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Ах да, я про них и забыл. Начиная с 1974 года я заливал сканы ПК только со спецгашениями. ОК, чистые перезаливайте, если вы считаете что можете предложить сканы лучшего качества. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 22:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Хорошо, чистые добавляю и перезаливаю. А как назвать первые 3 ПКсОМ? --Matsievsky (talk) 22:42, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

"USSR PCWCS №01 10th anniversary of the world's first human space flight"; "USSR PCWCS №02 International geochemical congress"; "USSR PCWCS №03 International limnological congress". Я предлагаю так, чтобы поддержать единообразие в именовании сканов ПК. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:22, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Спасибо! --Matsievsky (talk) 18:51, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Загрузил ПКсОМ №1. 1) С переводом описания на английский поможете или мне поручите? 2) Нужно ли викифицировать по-возможности каждое слово, ведь это не статья в Википедии, а краткое описание карточки, и чем больше викификации, тем лучше? 3) Продолжать категоризацию или уже достаточно имеющихся категорий? --Matsievsky (talk) 11:07, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

1) К сожалению, сейчас не располагаю временем для этого. Да и в переводах помощник из меня не лучший. 2) Насколько я знаю, викификация в описаниях дело сугубо добровольное, поступайте как считаете нужным. Я когда грузил сюда сканы ПК себе голову не морочил. 3) Дополнил еще двумя категориями. На мой взгляд, все необходимые категории имеются. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 21:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

В интернете имеются четкие отдельные изображения штемпелей для ПКсОМ. Следует ли их помещать на склад? И следует ли вырезать марки из ПКсОМ и помещать их на склад? --Matsievsky (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Штемпели - да, поскольку они относятся к знакам почтовой оплаты и их оттиски освобождаются от АП согласно {{PD-RU-exempt}}. Да, это отличная идея! штемпели могут послужить прекрасным иллюстративным материалом. С вырезками я бы не спешил. на мой взгляд, важнее предложить в качестве потенциальной иллюстрации конверт или карточку целиком, нежели только марку. Нередко целые ПКсОМ или ХМКсОМ раскрывают тему лучше отдельной марки-вырезки. Если кому-то понадобится только марка — её не проблема вырезать из скана приемлемого качества. Я честно говоря сканы вырезок не люблю, есть, например, категория Original stamps, которая повергает меня в уныние — она совершенно непонятна для иностранцев, и как ей придать божеский вид, не представляю. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 21:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

А куда лучше помещать штемпеля? Наверно, в какую-то отдельную категорию. И как некоторые из них связать с ПКсОМами? Ведь на ПКсОМах могут быть специальные штемпеля необязательно из каталога ПКсОМов... Было бы лучше при именовании гашеных ПКсОМов указывать номер штемпеля по каталогу. Кстати, какой каталог штемпелей нужно использовать? А категорию с оригинальными марками лучше переименовать в "марки, вырезанные из карточек и конвертов" или как-то так. --Matsievsky (talk) 18:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Пока в наличии имеется только хронологическая категория Postmarks of the Soviet Union by year. Вероятно, потребуется Postmarks of the Soviet Union by city по аналогии с Postmarks of Russia by city, а также Special postmarks of the Soviet Union by subject с дальнейшей детализацией по аналогии категорий "by subject" для марок, конвертов и карточек с оригинальной маркой. Или пока ограничиться Special postmarks of the Soviet Union, поскольку работы здесь будет непочатый край. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:11, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Нумеровать, вероятно, следует по каталогу Якобса, он наиболее известен. А вот связать с карточками или конвертами напрямую, мне кажется, проблематично. Либо через узкоспециализированные тематические категории вроде «XXX in philately of the Soviet Union», где XXX — некое событие, по поводу которого выпускались не только почтовые марки, но также карточки, конверты и готовились специальные штемпели для спецгашений. Например, 10-летие первого полёта человека в космос было отмечено серией марок и блоком, которые гасились специальным штемпелем первого дня. Помимо этого вышла почтовая карточка (№1), с ней связано как минимум 6 почтовых спецштемпелей (3 в Москве, а также Калуга, Звёздный городок, Гагарин). Если не ошибаюсь, был также ХМК со стандартной маркой, который тоже гасился теми же штемпелями. В идеале, при наличии сканов всех этих материалов, они могли бы категоризироваться в одну категорию. Как-то так. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:54, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Buckwheat and products from it 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 16:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 Hotel Metropol Moscow 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 House of Trusts 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cccefalon 04:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Kievsky Rail Terminal 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Atamari 21:29, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Kievsky Rail Terminal Tower 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 21:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 Trading house of the Moscow Merchant Society 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice perspective --Daniel Case 02:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Evropeisky shopping center 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Code 05:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2015 night in Moscow - Evropeisky shopping center 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Code 05:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Delicious foods made with apples 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  weak for a single shot. Third opinion appreciated --Hubertl 10:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)  Support I think it's QI. --Mайкл Гиммельфарб 02:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

FP

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Buckwheat and products from it 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Buckwheat and products from it 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

You deserve this much more than I do. Great shot! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

This nomination and the result was unexpected for me. Thank you so much! --Andrey Korzun (talk) 13:58, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:USSR PCWCS №36 Sail training ship Kruzenshtern sp.cancellation Philadelphia.jpg

Спасибо, Андрей, за загрузку этого файла. Пригодился! :) См. ru:Интерфил-76. Откуда у тебя этот любопытный сувенир? И точно ли художник И. Литвинов? Дело в том, что в те же годы и в похожей манере над марками и цельными вещам СССР хорошо трудился художник Николай Кириллович Литвинов. Ошибки (опечатки) не могло быть? С уважением, --Michael Romanov (talk) 10:28, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Я рад, что скан пригодился. Карточку покупал давно у одного знакомого коллекционера, через интернет-аукцион Молоток.ру, который недавно закрылся, к сожалению. Гашение не часто встречается. Хотя у этой карточки есть и более любопытные разновидности, я имею в виду ошибку в выходных данных (указан 1975 год вместо 1976-го) и типографское гашение на повторном выпуске. Карточка с ошибкой раритет, а типографское гашение на повторке у меня в коллекции имеется, только она не отсканирована. Тоже, кстати, встречается не часто. Про художника ничего сказать не могу, взял информацию из специализированного каталога Стандарт-Коллекция по советским ПК и ХМК с ОМ, второе издание 2006 г. Каталог этот грешит множественными ошибками и опечатками. Не раз спотыкался. Не удивлюсь, если составители и в этом случае что-то напутали. С другой стороны, в каталоге у ПК №33 также указан художник И. Литвинов, но у ПК №16 — Н. Литвинов. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 20:31, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Прошелся по твоим загрузкам, Андрей. Браво! Ты, наверно, один из лучших фотографов и "загрузчиков" на Складе, которых я встречал. Очень качественные и художественные фото! И масса отснятых объектов живой и неживой (чаще рукотворной) природы! Конверты и карточки - вообще отдельная благодарность. Уже вставил часть из них в следующие статьи:

• ru:Антарктическая филателия
• ru:Балет в филателии
• ru:Всемирный почтовый союз
• ru:Всесоюзное общество филателистов
• ru:Гоголь в филателии
• ru:История почты и почтовых марок Азербайджана
• ru:История почты и почтовых марок Армении
• ru:История почты и почтовых марок Венгрии
• ru:Лениниана (филателия)
• ru:Министерство связи СССР
• ru:Московская Олимпиада в филателии
• ru:Музыкальная филателия
• ru:Первая марка России
• ru:Полярная почта и филателия
• ru:Почта России
• ru:Соцфилэкс-75
• ru:Союзпечать
• ru:Спорт в филателии
• ru:Центральный телеграф (компания)

Хорошо бы и другие тоже использовать для иллюстраций статей. Вопрос: в некоторых случаях ты даешь каталожный номер по ЦФА или Стандарт-Коллекции, но иногда номер указан, а каталог - нет. Поэтому в последнем случае я проставлял в статьях каталог "интуитивно" - на свое усмотрение. Хотя, конечно, не исключаю ошибок. По Литвинову - понял. Еще раз спасибо! --Michael Romanov (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Михаил, спасибо, твой отзыв мне лестен, и меня радует, что сканы используются в статьях. Вообще твоя работа в ру-вики восхищает, с удовольствием прочитал статьи на филателистическую тематику. Я полностью доверяю твоей компетенции; речь, видимо, идёт о российских ПК/ХМК с ОМ. Если не ошибаюсь, по ним разные каталоги придерживаются единой нумерации, принятой в ИТЦ Марка. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Андрей, спасибо за уточнение. Кстати, еще в двух статьях очень пригодились твои картмаксимумы: ru:Картмаксимум, ru:Максимамфилия.Жаль, что тебе пришлось покинуть РВП. (Не вдавался в подробности той "истории", но в любом случае она не идет на пользу проекту в целом.) Удачи! Michael Romanov (talk) 08:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Спасибо! --Andrey Korzun (talk) 23:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

FoP Stuff

Hello Andrey! I'd like to ask you a big favor. Could you please wait with nominating No-FOP-in-RU until the current WLM is over? I talked to the organizers from RUwiki and they are keeping track of the uploads and nominate them if needed. It would make things a lot easier for all of us if we could centralize the problem. Thanks for your help! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:32, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Hedwig . I think that now is relatively little problem files, and so easy to work with them. They are easier to control at the present time than when they would be several thousand. Unfortunately, the organizers previous WLM negligently attitude to NO-FOP-files. I've seen dozens of such files years later, I directed them to the DR's. I am sure that in Commons there are still many files previous competitions. Forgot about them. But they are dangerous for Commons, is a serious problem. The recent blocking of Wikipedia in Russian gives alarming signal. I am skeptical to the ability of the organizers to solve this problem, or maybe they do not have the intention. Some WLM-activists directly declare that Russian laws to comply is not necessary. How they can be trusted to the job? Not that I very much wanted to do it, but I do not know what to do. Best regards. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 07:49, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, we can't judge the whole country if one person doesn't want to play by the rules. What I would like to ask from you is that you don't tag FOP problems for the time being. Could you do me this favor? --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 01:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

But the NO-FOP-files obviously violate the Russian law and can not be at Commons, is not it? I think this is a subject for wider discussion. I have found that there is a template {{NoFoP-Russia}}. As a compromise I propose to temporarily set this template instead of deletion requests. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

That's a great idea! Thank you very much Andrey! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 03:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

But unfortunately, I have now not enough time. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 07:34, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:USSR EWCS №21 Rusanov sp.cancellation Arkhangelsk.jpg

And also:

• File:USSR EWCS №21 Rusanov sp.cancellation Moscow.jpg
• File:USSR EWCS №21 Rusanov sp.cancellation Oryol.jpg
• File:USSR EWCS №38 Tammsaare sp.cancellation Moscow.jpg
• File:USSR EWCS №38 Tammsaare sp.cancellation Tallinn.jpg
• File:USSR EWCS №39 Ayni sp.cancellation Dushanbe.jpg
• File:USSR EWCS №39 Ayni sp.cancellation Moscow.jpg
• File:USSR EWCS №40 Tamanyan sp.cancellation Yerevan.jpg
• File:USSR PCWCS №43 Pyotr Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky sp.cancellation Leningrad.jpg
• File:USSR PCWCS №43 Pyotr Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky sp.cancellation Lipetsk.jpg
• File:USSR PCWCS №45 Pyotr Nesterov sp.cancellation.jpg
• File:USSR PCWCS №59 F.Bellingshausen sp.cancellation Leningrad.jpg
• File:USSR PCWCS №59 F.Bellingshausen sp.cancellation Moscow.jpg
• File:USSR PCWCS №49 Felix Dzerzhinsky sp.cancellation Moscow.jpg

Yours sincerely, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:30, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Folk_art_by_nations

Folk art by nations has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

S a g a C i t y (talk) 09:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello Andrey Korzun, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Эмблема-ГМЗ-Царицыно.jpg

File:Эмблема-ГМЗ-Царицыно.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!

Яй (talk) 13:09, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Category:Local history museums

Hi, you were very fast in making a redirect here. I think this is a useful and much needed category. 'Local museums' (quite a meaningless term, really) is a wider category than 'local history museums', eg a museum about a local artist or celebrity, a local building, a local tradition, etc. Of course there is an overlap but that goes for any category. The fact that most local history museums are now in 'local museums' - by lack of the correct category - is not a reason to prolong this situation. In any case, 'local history museums' is a more appropriate term than 'local museums'. Because when you think of it, which museum isn't a local museum? Agree? Best, Kleon3 (talk) 08:46, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Compact_сassette_collections

Category:Compact_сassette_collections has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

E4024 (talk) 12:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Category:Coats_of_arms_on_porcelain_plates

Coats of arms on porcelain plates has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Yakikaki (talk) 07:32, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Europa 1974 BRD series.jpg

Copyright status: File:Europa 1974 BRD series.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Europa 1974 BRD series.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Fixed Andrey Korzun (talk) 05:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Europa 1979 BRD series.jpg

Copyright status: File:Europa 1979 BRD series.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Europa 1979 BRD series.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Jcb (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Fixed Andrey Korzun (talk) 05:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Florentine_mosaic

Florentine mosaic has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Themightyquill (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2019 (UTC)