User talk:JLPC/Archive 1

User talk:JLPC/Archive 1

Photos Charente

Bonjour JLPC. Merci pour vos superbes photos ! Je corrige quelques catégories de ci de là, mais vous vous êtes très bien débrouillé. N'hésitez pas pour toute question ou aide à discuter avec moi (cliquer sur le (d) de ma signature). Bonne continuation, Jack ma (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Bien que retraité, je débute... N'hésitez pas à corriger car j'avance un peu au jugé. J'ai eu souvent recours à vos photos (quel travail ! depuis combien de temps ?) pour comprendre certains mécanismes du téléversement et les points essentiels de la syntaxe des légendes. Pour ce qui concerne certains villages du Sud-Charente, j'évite de téléverser ce qui peut faire doublon avec vos photos, lesquelles, le plus souvent, font le tour de la question avec méthode et culture.

Merci de vos encouragements et de vos interventions.

J'espère que j'écris au bon endroit. Si ce n'est pas le cas, j'essaierai de vous joindre par mail classique

JLPC

Oui, j'ai bien "senti" que vous n'aviez pas versé de photos qui font doublon, ce qui est très bien, sauf si elles sont plus belles ce qui ne doit pas être difficile ;-) Vous avez réussi à entrer dans certaines églises où je n'avais pas réussi à avoir la clé (ex: Champagne-Vigny). Pour de nombreuses communes, j'ai aussi avancé au jugé, n'ayant pas l'article en tête ou ce qu'il fallait voir (j'avais quand même une idée si une église était classée). Je suis parfois passé à côté de certains monuments ou objets classés, ou lieux "connus" d'un village. J'essaie aussi de prendre par beau temps, mais ce n'est pas toujours facile. Il faudrait refaire pas mal de communes du Nord Charente ou Charente Limousine. Vous pouvez m'écrire sur ma page fr:Discussion utilisateur:Jack ma et intervenir sur les articles pour ajouter/remplacer de nouvelles photos. Bien cordialement, Jack ma (talk) 18:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Modifier un fichier en utilisant une application externe

17:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC),

Bonjour,

Ne me servant jamais de la fonction « Modifier ce fichier en utilisant une application externe », je t’indique ma méthode.

1. Je télécharge le fichier original de l’image sur mon ordinateur. S’il s’agit d’un de mes fichiers, je saute cette étape.
2. Je fais les modifications et j’enregistre toujours le fichier terminé avec le même nom en respectant chaque caractère.
3. J’utilise « Importer une nouvelle version de ce fichier ». Je renseigne les champs pour expliquer mon action.
4. Cela fonctionne parfaitement (il arrive très souvent que l’affichage du nouveau fichier soit correct après plusieurs jours ; le fichier n’est pas en cause).

Très cordialement,

Βερναρδ [✍]-

Léonard Jarraud

Bonjour JLPC. Merci pour tes photos de Léonard Jarraud, souvent moins floues que les miennes et plus droites. Quelques petits conseils lors du déchargement :

• l'auteur de la photo doit avoir un lien: ex: [[User:JLPC|JLPC]] (JLPC et non pas JLPC), (page de déchargement classique; dans le logiciel commonist il suffit de le mettre 1 fois)
• j'ai remplacé "own work" par {{own}}, ainsi ça apparaît dans la langue du lecteur (c'est pareil)
• de même, pour les dates, 2012-01-12 appraît en français, alors que 2012.01.12 reste tel quel.
• pour "l'homme à la pendule", il me semble que le blanc est trop bleuté. Même sous l'éclairage du musée, il me semble que la couleur naturelle était un peu plus jaune (je sais, c'est difficile de respecter les couleurs naturelles du tableau). Personnellement je les ai prises sans flash (pour respecter des ombres et des couleurs), et je n'ai pas retouché les couleurs.
• je ne suis pas sûr qu'il faille inclure les cadres dans les photos. Voir d'autres photos de tableaux. Ex: les photos de paysages (les chaumes, entre La Couronne et Claix), que je trouve belles.
• n'hésite pas à mettre à jour l'article wiki:fr fr:Léonard Jarraud (j'ai séché sur la biographie; mais le musée est assez riche en informations, en particulier son séjour à l'île dOléron)

Bonne continuation, Jack ma (talk) 07:09, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Parrainage

Bonjour,

Vous parrainer comment ?

C'est super d'avoir plein de photos mais si vous avez des photos qui peuvent être insérées sur wilkipédia ce sera encore plus super de pouvoir illustrer des articles, parfois on y pense pas.

Pierre Boujut

Bonjour,
Petit doute : est-ce bien vous le photographie qui a pris les 3 photos de Pierre Boujut en 1983 dans son bureau ? Désolé du dérangement et de ma suspicion... Merci pour votre travail. ----MGuf (d) 18:58, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Modifier un fichier...

Merci d'avoir prêté attention à ma demande. Je n'avais pas vu ta réponse hier soir. Je téléverse depuis septembre et, bien que pratiquant la retouche avant de téléverser, il m'arrive d'avoir des remords de conscience concernant des points de détail... Je vois que mon souci d'économie (de place) n'est pas justifié : tant mieux. Cependant, sauf cas exceptionnel, si j'importe un nouveau fichier, c'est que l'ancien n'a plus de raison d'être. Or je constate qu'en important une nouvelle version, l'ancienne n'est pas écrasée mais toujours disponible. J'ai dû faire quelques erreurs concernant la dénomination des fichiers : il faut que les nouvelles versions portent exactement le même nom que les précédentes [pourtant, mon fichier L.J._La_route2, (visible ici : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:L.J._La_route2.jpg) est toujours en double, malgré l'invite de commonist à écraser le premier...]. Le problème n'est pas capital et, si je résume, au cas où je voudrais me débarrasser de quelques fichiers inutiles, il me suffit de faire une demande de suppression. À voir. --Merci encore de ton attention.JLPC (talk) 11:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Oui, quand tu "écrases" un fichier avec la nouvelle version, on voit la nouvelle sur la page, mais l'ancienne est disponible quand même dans l'historique... comme sur un wiki... c'en est un d'ailleurs ! Il peut arriver de devoir demander la suppression d'une ancienne version (vidéo "libre", mais avec bande son "copyvio", ou vandalisme avec diffamation...), mais le terme exact est "masquage", car elle peut être visible quand même par les administrateurs ; il y a même un niveau supérieur pour les cas pénalement grave, le oversight, qui masque des versions également aux admins. Mais de toutes façons, tout reste toujours sur les disques durs de la Foundation. Donc ne te soucie de rien, tout va bien. Et accessoirement, tu peux revenir facilement à une ancienne version en cas de remord. Cordialement, ----MGuf (d) 11:38, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Nouvelles photos

Bonjour JLPC. Merci pour tes nouvelles photos ! Juste quelques petites remarques: pour le remplissage de la date, il vaut mieux écrire 2011-08-27 que 2011.08.27; elle apparaît ainsi dans la langue de l'utilisateur. Pour les photos de plaques, il vaut mieux les éviter car ce sont des oeuvres, donc l'auteur doit être mort de plus de 70 ans etc... De plus, si c'est du texte, on ne peut pas le reproduire tel quel dans WP (idem pour tout panneau explicatif d'un monument etc.). Ex: File:Peudry Ganivet 2012.jpg, qu'il vaut mieux transcrire dans l'article en le modifiant légèrement (copyvio). Sais-tu à quelle adresse dans Angoulême se trouve la maison natale de JLGdB ? Cordialement et bonne continuation (la belle saison approche), Jack ma (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Pour ce qui est de la date, j'avais cru comprendre l'inverse. Pour ce qui concerne la plaque Ganivet, je demande la suppression de mon fichier Peudry_Ganivet au sujet de quoi, en téléversant, j'ai eu un doute que tu confirmes. Je laisse le texte en l'état : ça n'a pas grande importance. Pour ce qui est de Guez, sa maison natale est... l'hôtel Mercure. Je n'ai donc pas voulu mettre la photo (mais mon option anti-pub est discutable). La plaque, elle, est de 1840 : pas de problème.-- Oui, la belle saison approche. Il manque encore quelques nuages dans le ciel.-- Par ailleurs, j'en ai presque terminé avec l'article Jarraud. J'ai fouillé pas mal, trouvé peu de choses mais j'ai pu mettre la main sur le livre de sa cousine Régina, livre paru en 1941, et j'ai été bien accueilli au CDI du Musée. Le livre de Régina Jarraud contient deux photos : une du Léonard à 35 ans (donc prise en 1883) et l'autre qui le représente dans ses vieux jours (donc prise avant 1926). Elles n'ont pas de nom d'auteur, mais je présume qu'elles sont dans le domaine public. Je les ai scannées et retouchées. Elles sont donc téléchargeables. À voir. -- Association d'idées : je crois me souvenir que tu as téléversé le magnifique tableau (Le port de l'Houmeau) de Gaston Boucart : or, ce dernier est mort en 1962, donc son œuvre ne doit pas être dans le domaine public. À voir aussi.-- Cordialement.JLPC (talk) 19:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Pour la date, fais l'essai et tu verras l'affichage changer. Oui bien sûr, c'est l'hôtel Mercure anciennement de la Paix (je ne me souvenais plus ;-) Mais on peut mettre le numéro et la rue, sans mentionner le nom de l'hôtel (Mercure, quel nom agressif ;-). Pour Léonard Jarraud, je suis content que tu avances. Je pense en effet que tu peux télécharger ces 2 photos en mentionnant la source et la date. Pour le port de l'Houmeau, je savais qu'il était de 1926 (même si le sujet peint était de 1880). Si quelqu'un demande sa suppression, je ne m'y opposerai pas... et il faudra attendre 20 ans. Voir aussi toutes les photos de bâtiments relativement récents (viaducs, panneaux, mairies, etc.). Bonne continuation, Jack ma (talk) 06:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Merci et salutations

Bonjour JLPC

Merci de votre soutien de mes images dans la page des images de qualité.

Comme je crois que c'est la première fois que j'ai le plaisir de vous croiser, je voulais vous adresser ce petit signe.

...Et même si je suis "Maritime (17)" moi, ça fait plaisir de s'adresser à un Charentais !!! On trouve des gens du monde entier dans "Commons" (J'ai des attaches dans le sud-Charente.)

Bien cordialement,--Jebulon (talk) 23:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Salut JLPC

Merci pour tes commentaires. Je n'ai pas souvent l'occasion d'en avoir en français, c'est plaisant. Tes photos sont excellentes et comme j'ai vu que tu étais à la retraite, tu auras beaucoup de temps pour en ajouter d'autres. Bonne continuation. --Bgag (talk) 12:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nonac La Léotardie2 NE 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Bgag 03:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Plantes en QI

bonjour,

Pour les propositions d'organismes vivants (plantes ou animaux), note qu'une identification scientifique (en latin, italiques, premier mot avec une majuscule, deuxième sans, ainsi que le veut l'usage des biologistes) est exigée, et doit figurer au moins dans la page de description de l'image. Les deux photos que tu viens de placer ne seront pas acceptées en l'état. Pour les plantes, tu peux si besoin trouver de l'aide dans le projet "botanique" de wikipédia, rubrique "quelle est cette plante". Ce sont des passionnés, très aimables, compétents et réactifs

Cordialement, --Jebulon (talk) 22:36, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, merci de ton message.

Petit détail: tu as oublié de le signer ! . Ce n'est pas grave en soi, mais la signature automatique présente entre autres l'avantage de permettre au destinataire, d'un simple clic, d'aller sur la page du signataire pour lui répondre.

Tu as un bon exemple de la suite des événements: alors qu'Archaeodontosaurus a soutenu ton ail (très réussi sur le plan photographique), je me suis (temporairement) opposé à sa promotion rapide, tant qu'il ne sera pas "identifié" (je t'aurais évidemment aidé si j'avais pu, mais je suis parfaitement ignare en botanique). Ton image va donc partir en "Consensual review", ce qui te laisse tout le temps de compléter la description. Dès que ce sera fait, tu pourras mettre le petit " Done", et je transformerai mon opposition en soutien. De toutes façons, cette image passera aisément compte tenu de sa qualité. L'autre il est vrai est cadrée trop serré, ce qui est dommage.

User:Archaeodontosaurus est un excellent ami, c'est lui qui a promu ma première QI, et qui m'a accueilli ici d'une façon inoubliable. Il est toujours didactique, passionné, excellent photographe et technicien, et très agréablement déjanté (je le salue s'il me lit ici...). C'est un scientifique italophile, mélomane et humaniste, et un homme très amical. Tu peux te tourner vers lui en tant que de besoin, il te réservera le meilleur accueil. Je t'engage à faire sa connaissance, à travers ses diverses pages et sa production, c'est du très haut de gamme, artistiquement et techniquement ! J'ai énormément appris en le fréquentant ici (et par messages privés), et pas seulement en photographie. Il est aussi un grand "contributeur" du projet "Commons", et participe grandement à le faire vivre avec intelligence et détermination, mais toujours de façon apaisée.--Jebulon (talk) 09:32, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

IMO est un acronyme angliciste commode servant à atténuer le ton d'un désaccord. Il signifie "In My Opinion". Tu peux le trouver en Français : AMA ( à mon avis), ou même AMhA (à mon humble avis). L'Évaluation Consensuelle (Consensual Review) sert à prendre un peu de temps pour débloquer les désaccords, en permettant à d'autres évaluateurs de donner leur opinion jusqu'à ce qu'une majorité se dégage. Ça se passe tout en bas de page, dans les cadres jaunes. C'est parfois long et homérique. Va voir et tu comprendras.--Jebulon (talk) 11:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montmoreau pont sur la Tude.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{o}} Strong CAs on the trees--Lmbuga 20:34, 12 May 2012 (UTC)CAs corrected.--JLPC 06:14, 13 May 2012 (UTC) QI to me. Better, thanks--Lmbuga 17:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ile Madame Carrelet côte N.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good picture. --Bgag 22:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ail ornemental-St-Amant 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Barèges Lac Blanc 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 21:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaysersberg Vignoble 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Óðinn 21:58, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Réponse

J'ai l'habitude, très contestable, de répondre sur ma page...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

VI

Tu t'es bien débrouillé. Le nom binomial doit toujours être en italique (règle universelle). Le scope est réduit à "Fleur". Pour la botanique il est conseillé de découper en : habitus, fleur, feuille, fruit... Comme tu l'a compris ce n'est qu'un question de qualité photographique mais de valeur encyclopédique qui compte ici. C'est le label qui à le plus d’intérêt à mes yeux. Il n'est pas acquis de façon définitive d'autre viendront et nous succéderons à ce palmarès temporaire. Revient souvent en VI...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:22, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Epiphyllum St-Cybard 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 framing problem: missing pieces of the flower --Archaeodontosaurus 06:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC) Done Flower complete now. -- JLPC 10:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vigny Maine-Giraud 2011a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 08:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barèges Jonquère 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 14:45, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Palante Villa Hillion.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 15:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bréhat Ajoncs 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Shot on a hazy day, buy QI for me. --Óðinn 22:32, 24 May 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:
Allium atropurpureum, flower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Bug signature QI

Hop, c'est corrigé, je pense qu'il y a eu un conflit d'Edith et du coup le serveur savait plus quelle signature générer :s Léna (talk) 23:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maine-Giraud tour 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The crop may be a bit tight but good quality. --Selbymay 21:12, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nigella damascena 2012 .jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SNCF Téléph alarme Paris-Bordx 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barèges 65 Barrage Dets Coubous 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 23:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hibiscus rosa-sinensis2 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 Good quality. --Moroder 23:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plassac-Rouffiac Silo 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Bgag 17:37, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crassula ovata 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Biopics 11:43, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

SET in VI

Pour ton SET il manque le fruit tel que Nigella arvensis fruit.jpg ou alors les graines, pour être complet. N'as tu pas l'un ou l'autre? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bréhat StMichel Nw.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, nice composition.--ArildV 05:30, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chasseneuil-sur-B Mémorial 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and useful.--Jebulon 22:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Poitiers ND Tympan 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 18:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Réponse

Bonjour JLPC,

Merci de ton message auquel je réponds bien tardivement.

Merci aussi de ton examen attentif de mon château de Champs sur Marne, j'ai voulu faire des essais sur cette photo, et finalement, grâce aux commentaires de lifar et aux tiens, j'ai pu réussir à en tirer quelque chose.

C'est au départ une photo prise un peu à contre jour, la lumière vient de droite, mais de derrière.

Si je voulais une façade suffisamment éclairée, alors j'avais un ciel sur-exposé, presque blanc, avec un toit "brûlé". Si je voulais un ciel bleu joli, alors j'avais une façade presque noire... j'ai donc utilisé la technique des "masques de calques" avec GIMP, et superposé une version sous exposée (ciel correct) et une version sur-exposée (façade correctement lumineuse) de la même photo, en effaçant les parties inutiles d'une couche sous l'autre. Mais comme j'ai voulu aller trop vite, il y avait plein de petits défauts, que je crois avoir fini par corriger. La photo a finalement été promue, non sans mal (c'est comme ça qu'on progresse, mais seulement grâce au "harcèlement" amical des autres, ainsi lifar, pour ce cas.)

Je vois que ta progression est très rapide, tu en es à proposer des "sets" en VI de très bonne qualité, c'est assez difficile, mais avec les judicieux conseils d'Archaeodontosaurus, tu es vite arrivé au niveau !!

Ne t'inquiète pas pour les sujets de tes images. A mon avis, si tu photographies quelque chose qui t'intéresse, quelque soit le domaine, alors c'est perceptible pour celui qui regarde la photo, et il adhèrera, peu ou prou. L'inverse est vrai: ceux qui ne cherchent qu'à aligner les "QI" sont transparents dans leur démarche, qui ne trompe personne...

Je te félicite spécialement, car tu viens d'avoir une image florale promue par Biopics, et crois-moi, ce n'est pas rien. Tu ignores les batailles homériques (je reprends ton terme) dans lesquelles il a été impliqué il y a quelques temps (sous un autre pseudonyme), mais crois-moi, ce fut "chaud". Très. Il s'était rendu odieux dans sa participation à tous les labels (QI, VI et FP). Il a même été exclu temporairement, et a également quitté "Commons" de lui-même pour un temps. Il revient donc, semble-t'il animé d'intentions plus paisibles, car il était humainement imbuvable. Il avait des exigences excessives, et formulées de façon extrêmement hautaines et désagréables, persuadé de son omniscience. C'est un scientifique flamand de haute volée, spécialisé semble-t-il dans le milieu marin de la Mer du Nord, va voir ses photos, c'est une suite de véritables merveilles !

En tout état de cause, bravo pour ta rapide intégration, et d'ores et déjà merci pour tes belles et intéressantes photos !

Cordialement,--Jebulon (talk) 16:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Cleome spinosa

Petit problème sur ta légende

Cleome spinosa Jacq.1760 (:fr:Nikolaus Joseph von Jacquin) réf : Enum. pl. Carib. (1760) p. 26.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cleome spinosa 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good image and merci for the proper use of italics with scientific names! Biopics 22:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Abbaye de Beauport

Si tu rajouter sur ta photo :(Facade) le scope est recevable; mais tu te ferme pleine de porte. Fait un SET des 4 image que tu as pour l’extérieur et tu en fera un autre plus tard avec l’intérieur. Au total tu aura fait quelque chose de coohérant et tu aura 8 Labels... :) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abbadia Château&brebis 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 16:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Glassnakille Skye Postbox.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Beauty of simplicity --Zivya 09:15, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Yes, but why not better centered ?--Jebulon 16:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Set Promotion

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Nigella damascena.

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Nigella damascena.
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

--MrPanyGoff 09:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anacamptis-pyramidalis 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! --Florstein 06:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Juglans regia autumn 2009.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 I guess. --Mattbuck 13:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aubeterre Portail 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Seems a bit blurry, could it be sharpened? Mattbuck 12:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)  Done Is it better now ? --JLPC 22:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 13:29, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

A recent QI review revisited

Hi JLPC,

You recently supported my photo File:Asmild Kirke 2012-05-28.jpg at QIC, whereafter it got promoted. However, it has been brought to my attention that my original photo had extreme chromatic aberration at the left edge of the white wall and the trunk of the tree to the left. I have taken the liberty to correct that and upload a new version after the QI promotion. Normally, I would not touch a promoted QI, but the CA was really an eyesore, so I had to fix it:-) I just wanted to inform you about that and also let you have a look again if it is still OK in your opinion. If not I will revert to the QI revision. Thanks, --Slaunger (talk) 19:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi JLPC, I certainly do not have any problems understanding your English, but you would probably have great difficulties understanding my written French . Actually, there is another Frech user, who I can see has visited your user page, who has once commented to me that my written French was closer to Polish than French. I found that very amusing. But he was right. Anyway, thanks for your further comment. There are two things which are a first timer for me as well in that photo. And that is to make an exposure fusion between three bracketed exposured - HDRish (thus the motion blur of the trees), and the other one to correct CA. Actually I do not have a clue how to correct it, but I noticed that in the raw editing program that accompanied my recently acquired new DSLR, there was a CA correction tuning option, and I noticed that helped a lot on the very strong CA on the vertical sides of the wall and the trunk of the tree. I agree with you regarding the remaining CA on the grey tombstone, but I do not know how to fix that so I will just leave it be.

I have noticed your user name a few times now, and it seems like you are making good progress here on Commons, and that you are generally having a good time. It is a pleasure to see that. It reminds me a bit of that other French user a few years back, who now has uploaded large amounts of QIs, VIs and FPs. --Slaunger (talk) 22:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Slaunger speaks about me. And yes, his written French looks like Polish (i guess, because I don't know Polish ! ). Anyway, we became very good friends, and met recently in Paris with a great mutual pleasure. He is a very wise and friendly contributor, very good photographer, i encourage you to ask frequently. As me, you will learn a lot in "Commons" through him ! --Jebulon (talk) 00:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

@Jebulon: Kind of you to say, mais c'est une erreur ! I am an amateur photographer - not even 10 FPs after five years on Commons , and really in Paris, you were the one I learned a lot from. --Slaunger (talk) 20:19, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Navette Hendaye-Fontarrabie1 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good.--Jebulon 14:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Bon soir JLCP! It is a pleasure to see your high quality and valuable contributions to Commons, your endeavours to understand all our weird image nomination systems, and also help review the contributions of others in a calm and collegial manner. All in all it helps creating and maintaining a mellow atmosphere at Commons. I am looking forward to following your continued work here. Best wishes from Denmark. Slaunger (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Ne serait-ce pas ta première "Image Remarquable" ? Félicitations !--Jebulon (talk) 23:01, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Bravo, et en plus les félicitation de Slaunger ... nous nous avions mis des années pour en arriver là.... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Angoulême Balcon 2012.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Crop maybe a bit tight, but good for QI, especially because of light and sharpness.--Jebulon 21:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Trois mots... réponse

"Trop de notes" ?, c'est de lui .
Merci de ton message.--Jebulon (talk) 12:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Les précédents panneaux, du même modèle (l'un promu, l'autre ignoré), venaient de Fontainebleau. Quant aux photos surexposées, tu as évidemment raison. Et enfin, pour ce qui concerne mon antagoniste préféré, ça fait des mois que ça dure. Tout va bien, tant que tu ne refuses pas une de ses photos. C'est là que ça se gâte, il fait régner une certaine forme de terreur et d'intimidation à laquelle certains ont déjà succombé (j'ai pu lire sous une de ses photos: ceci et ceci ne vont pas, ce n'est pas une QI, mais je ne remets pas en cause la promotion de cette photo, parce que tu vas générer un conflit et que je n'aime pas ça), ce qui est un comble. Il place en "Consensual review", de lui-même, toute photo de lui qui aurait été rejetée, c'est le cas en ce moment. Je suis opposé à cette pratique que j'ai tenté, sans succès, de faire interdire (la "CR" ne devant pas être une Cour d'appel, à mon sens, mais le moyen de départager deux avis différents hors celui du proposant). Puis il essaie de te ridiculiser, et prend de haut chaque remarque. Enfin, il passe à la menace de demander contre toi un blocage, j'en suis là. Je ne suis pas totalement innocent: sur ce coup-là, je l'ai provoqué. Mais l'arme de l'ironie et de la dérision sont les seules que je trouve compatibles avec les "règles du jeu".

Par dessus le marché, il essaie de se constituer des clientèles en promouvant à tout va les photos des nouveaux arrivants, dans l'espoir évident d'en faire ses obligés (en ce moment, notre compatriote Selbymay). Il a un affidé, qui le connait personnellement (ils font des photos ensemble) qui le suit comme un toutou et vient à sa rescousse quand une de ses images est en danger.

Notons toutefois qu'il a déjà été bloqué récemment ici, et qu'il est bloqué indéfiniment sur la wikipédia allemande (le conflit a même fait l'objet d'un article dans "Der Spiegel" !), essentiellement en raison de son sale caractère et de sa souplesse de barre à mine...

Comme je suis assez éruptif, j'ai parfois du mal à me contenir et à l'ignorer...

Bien à toi, --Jebulon (talk) 13:20, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Angoul StP Mandorle 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Il faudrait corriger la perspective.--Jebulon 22:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC) Done Is it better now ? -- JLPC 22:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC) Oh yes, far much better, (for my taste !)--Jebulon 23:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cassinomagus paysage 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Beautiful QI. --Selbymay 21:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Batz-s-M St Guénolé.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 colors. --Selbymay 21:32, 15 June 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:
Château de la Léotardie (Exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lantana Camara FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 niche image composition. --NorbertNagel 14:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Civray Chœur Mandorle 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 20:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Set Promotion

Congratulations!
The set of images you nominated for valued image set was reviewed and has now been promoted to the Valued image set: Abbaye de Beauport (Exterior).

It is considered to be the most valued set of images on Commons within the scope:
Abbaye de Beauport (Exterior).
If you would like to nominate another image set, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Angoul StP Saint Georges 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. Imo it will look even better, if you crop out upper elements. --Iifar 16:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)  Done Not a bad idea at all ! -- JLPC 19:45, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Angoul StP Saint Martin 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 08:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scabieuse colombaire FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit noisy maybe, but good.--Jebulon 23:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kaysersberg Vignoble b 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 09:42, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sauge de Graham FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Maybe a bit unsharp on the upper left flower and on the lower part of the stalk, but overall it's good. I like the different angles of the flowers. -- Aisano 17:38, 20 June 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:
Civray, fresque de Saint Gilles.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 SupportUseful. Explanations, of very good quality, could be made inside the caption of the photograph.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pivoine de Chine FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 06:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Angoulême Ens notaire 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 14:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Angoulême Ens tabac-journaux 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 14:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lavande off FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 11:04, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Changement de domaine en VIC

Bonsoir JLPC,

tu as récemment bien voulu soutenir mon image de l'entrée de l'École Nationale des Chartes dans les candidats aux Images de Valeur. Suite à la discussion en cours, j'ai été convaincu par les arguments proposés, et ai été amené à changer le scope. Selon la règle, je suis tenu de te le faire savoir, car après ce changement, ton vote initial '"tombe" et, de fait, ne compte plus.

Voilà qui est fait.

bien à toi, --Jebulon (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Méprise, maldonne et malentendu !!

Tu n'as commis aucun impair ! Tu as émis une opinion qui a été contestée (pas jusqu'au bout d'ailleurs, puisque c'est moi qui ai mis le tout sous cadre jaune), et c'est ainsi que ça se passe.

Donc tout va bien.

Mais comme le "scope" (domaine) a changé, ton vote pour l'image selon l'ancien domaine n'est de facto plus d'actualité, c'est juste l'application régulière de la règle, tu n'as absolument à t'excuser de rien, tout est normal !!--Jebulon (talk) 16:46, 26 June 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:
Vineyard in Kaysersberg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 21:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Civray Tympan 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, nice sharpness and details. --ArildV 22:30, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Millepertuis FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 07:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Bastille

Thanks for your comment. I can brigth up the picture, but with the wires the problem is that they where oscillating, and I already put some work to minimalise this effect by applying some masks. I don't think I can do much more with that. I'll send the corrected version in the evening or tomorrow morning. Regards, --sfu (talk) 12:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Done with a day delay. --sfu (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Civray Archivoltes détails 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Selbymay 21:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Civray Chapiteau griffons 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Selbymay 21:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Domaine viticole Chpgne-Vigny 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 16:04, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bréhat granit près Paon.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Sempervivum tectorum FR 2012.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 07:27, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St-Macaire 33 Rue Carnot 2009.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Ankara 21:17, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St-Amant16 Paysage-automne 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 16:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nonac16 paille 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 shot. --High Contrast 18:24, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vendoire 24 Maison tourbières 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 12:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)