User talk:Collard/Archive 7

you said that

"Kept. Grow up, Deleteers before I upload an animated GIF of it in acid-trip colours. If you don't like it or it insults your national pride, don't look at it. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 07:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)"

no words — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.232.173.19 (talk • contribs) 21:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

"No words" makes it two. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 08:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

De-adminship warning

Deutsch | Español

Dear Collard/Archive 7. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you

		The Commons Barnstar
		Hello, you have asked for a desysoped because you didn't have enough time anymore. I give you this barnstar for all your hard work at Commons. I hope that you will ask again for admin rights when you have enough time. With deep respect, Huib talk 19:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Pub or public house

Hi Collard, we seem to have both. I we would standardize, what would you prefer? Multichill (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. I'd prefer "pub", since that's the term everyone uses in conversation. I doubt you'd find "public house" outside of a legal document. :) Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 16:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok. That's what I thought too. I nominated all categories at Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Public houses and still have to nominate most of Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Public Houses (have to get rid of the capital H anyway). Multichill (talk) 17:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 365504 at King's Lynn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 dynamic range, attractive subject and composition. The first non-digitally recorded image I see here. --Iotatau 21:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ouse relief channel at last light.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 view, QI for me. -- Smial 18:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't understand your revert rationale.

RE. http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:When_to_use_the_PD-signature_tag&diff=next&oldid=32411666 I don't get it. You think more attention to what I boxed is bad? You think a box is bad? What does it matter whether it's used on a template or not? I don't get your edit summary at all.--Elvey (talk) 10:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not even sure what I was thinking. I was extremely tired at the time. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 21:47, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! German shepherd wanting to play.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good colours, correct focuse, adequate depth of field, composition OK... QI to me. Rama 17:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Colossus the Cat 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 He doesn't look particularly big... On the review side, there's a bit of overexposure on the nose, but nothing that really detracts from the image. Mattbuck 11:14, 2 August 2010 (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:
Canon T90.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support So... as if it is the best so far, imo.--MrPanyGoff 21:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:02, 5 February 2011 (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:
Nikon F55.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope.--MrPanyGoff 08:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Please Comment

here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&action=edit&section=50 . And Thank You for defending my genetic code figure in such a humorous way! Doug youvan (talk) 16:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! BMW E28 drifting (Tristan).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 22:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hyundai i10 in blue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 otherwise good and QI IMO. I think you have the oldest digital camera here! ArildV 15:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Konica C35.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Maybe a scope „Konica C35“ would be better no matter that the category with this name is not yet created. As I understand this is the only image of this model.--MrPanyGoff 15:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I thought about that. I didn't think the general scope of Konica cameras was a terribly over-wide one, as it is in fact quite representative of Konica cameras generally (the C35 and friends were enormously popular, their other cameras probably less so). Do feel free to ignore my reasoning and narrow the scope to one you think is more appropriate. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 19:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Of course, you can try the more general scope and since it has been your original intention let it be for now.--MrPanyGoff 20:10, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

 Comment Another good possibility for the scope is „Konica fixed-lens film cameras“.--MrPanyGoff 08:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Or maybe "Konica rangefinder cameras"? Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 19:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I  Support the model name scope and this is the best photograph of this camera.--MrPanyGoff 11:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:17, 22 March 2012 (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 10:49, 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! E28 drift car, Norfolk Arena.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Small but ok. --Mattbuck 19:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nissan drift car, white, front.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Small but ok. --Mattbuck 19:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2013-10-12 NDT Nick Statham R33 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 QI imo.--ArildV 15:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

-- Deadstar (msg) 13:25, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2014-07-05 NADT Ross Gregory.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 support In this picture the fact of being tilted is expressive IMO. It looks like the car took off. It is deliberately tilted. The quality is good. The picture is very hard to take. Only one fault: The car in the background is disturbing. The car would not be disturbing if it was complete.--Lmbuga 10:52, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2014-08-23 NADT Josh Phillips Mpact 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 {{{3}}}

Congrats. I was just to late to strike my oppose bofore the promotion.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:PD-JohnRogers

Template:PD-JohnRogers 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 template, 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. 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!

Jarekt (talk) 18:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)