User talk:Jim Evans

Me

James "Jim" Evans is a very common name. I am none of the people on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Evans

I mostly upload or edit photos here and add the photos I upload to germane Wikipedia pages. The Wiki jargon and script language are more than I want to learn. I use to use i_am_jim for the copyright release I changed it to Jim Evans. For reasons I don't understand, sometimes foobar appears and sometimes Wiki name (my previous name). I've been a member here since 2006 and maybe longer. Wiki name (talk) 16:21, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Alta Loma Historical Marker.jpg

File:Alta Loma Historical Marker.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Derivative of a copyright work Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

— JJMC89 (T·C) 05:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Alta Loma Historical Marker.jpg

File:Alta Loma Historical Marker.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!

Yann (talk) 08:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Merimax Building -- Galveston.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. --Dnalor 01 22:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sacred Heart Church Dome -- Galveston.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. --Zcebeci 16:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Quigg Baulard Cottage -- Galveston.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 14:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hawes Summer Home -- Galveston.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 --Michielverbeek 15:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 06:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jackie Andrews Private School -- Galveston.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 Sebring12Hrs16:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Henry C. Henck, Jr. House corner view.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. --ArildV 06:22, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Please mark materially altered images as "modified"

Hi there,

When you retouch the subject of an image (e.g. File:Home of Warren G. Harding 2011.jpg where you photoshopped out power lines), can you please add the {{Modified}} template with details of the changes so that we no modifications have been made?

Normally I'd also suggest uploading materially altered images such as this under new filename if you're not the creator, but since this is a Flickr image (i.e. the Commons upload isn't the original upload), it probably doesn't matter as much here.

It'd be useful if you could do this for your own images as well (e.g. the ones where the sky has been replaced).

Thank you,

Ubcule (talk) 13:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Refurbishment Platform for Drilling Rigs -- Corpus Christi.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. --Zcebeci 17:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The Heidenheimer Bros. Marine Building.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 --Michielverbeek 16:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! John M. Jones House -- Galveston.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 Just ok --Poco a poco 13:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jacobs Home earlier called Miller-Jacobs Home, Galveston.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. --MB-one 12:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Best Lucas House - Galveston.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 GQ --Palauenc05 17:24, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! George Seeligson Home -- Galveston.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 04:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The Cottage -- Galveston.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 Slightly tilted cw and please remove the fringes along the roof. --Palauenc05 16:48, 5 June 2020 (UTC)  Done  Comment Sorry, but there is still that white rim around the top of the tower. --Palauenc05 10:09, 6 June 2020 (UTC)  Done again, hope I got it all this time  Support --Palauenc05 16:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! J. F. Smith House -- Galveston.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. --MB-one 12:27, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Propst House, Hickory North Carolina (edit).jpg

Copyright status: File:Propst House, Hickory North Carolina (edit).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Propst House, Hickory North Carolina (edit).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.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 02:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

This is a derivative image derived from this image [1]. I uploaded it using this tool [2]. I have used this tool several times in the past and it has worked OK. Jim Evans (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mosque Houston, Clear Lake City, Texas.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 Diffcult, just over the bar --Poco a poco 21:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Mosque Houston, Clear Lake City, Texas.jpg

Hi Jim Evans, while categorizing quality images I found that the depicted mosque includes multiple prominent cross ornaments, even on the roof. This is very unusual for a mosque, but quite common for churches. Are you sure that this is a mosque? Unfortuantely, there is no geotag there. Best regards --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 12:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Seems I am not the only one who noticed the crosses. I am pretty sure it is the new church building of the Archangel Raphael Coptic Orthodox community (there is an artistic rendering on the donations page). --HyperGaruda (talk) 13:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

It looks like you're both correct. It looked like a mosque to me. I saw those things atop the domes. I'm not religious but I didn't recognize them as crosses. So, how do I correct this? The file will need to be renamed and I'd rather not lose the QI. I will immediately remove it from it's uses and remove the incorrect categories. Jim Evans (talk) 15:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

You won't lose the QI, but some ID and a proper name would help to use the image in Wikipedia. I added the suggestion by User:HyperGaruda to the description. Have you got an address for the building or some coordinates? --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Though GoogleMaps satellite imagery has not been updated recently, there is one StreetView position from May 2020 showing the completed building in the backyard of the old church. I'd say it is located at approximately 29.5799°N 95.1548°W / 29.5799; -95.1548. --HyperGaruda (talk) 03:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, that looks good. In the meantime the author had the imsge renamed. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 12:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Archangel Raphael Coptic Orthodox Church -- Houston Clear Lake City, Texas.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 Very nice! Upload it in higher resolution and I'll nominate it for FP --Frank Schulenburg 01:34, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! City National Bank Building -- Houston, Texas.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

identity

Hi Jim - could you check the identity of File:Common Texas Grackle.jpg, please? The wing coverts look too uniformly and brightly iridescent for Common Grackle. I'd reckon it is either Boat-tailed or Great-tailed, with the tail feathers only partly grown after the late summer molt. Location details (Texas is a big state!!) would help a lot; could you add them, please. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 22:42, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not a bird person. It's what we call a Grackle. In Googling grackles I realized there were a few varieties but it seemed to me to be like the ones described as Common. The article said you could distinguish Common Grackles from others by the yellow eyes and iridescent body. I can't find the article and picture it showed, but it was similar to this picture of a Common Grackle though the eyes were more yellow and there was no color behind the head [3] If you're confident it's another kind, just change it. I'll add in the description it's from the Houston Clear Lake area. Jim Evans (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks! Pretty certain now it's a Great-tailed Grackle which is common in the Houston area, and also has the yellow eye. That normally has a much longer tail, but it is the time of year when they've just shed the old feathers and are growing new ones. The important difference here is that the head and back are the same glossy dark blue as in your photo; compare the linked allaboutbirds Common Grackle pic, with the glossy blue head contrasting with the browner back. I'll change it in a bit. - MPF (talk) 22:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

And done! Hope it's OK :-) MPF (talk) 23:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Good job I'm sure. Do you specialize in Grackles? Jim Evans (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Just birds in general - been birding for years :-) MPF (talk) 00:42, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Campbell Home.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 05:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Armand Bayou Nature Center -- Entrance Sculpture.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cedar Bayou United Methodist Church -- Baytown, Texas.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 It's tilted (or needs a perspective correction). Metadata would be nice. --Trougnouf 21:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)  Comment Corrected tilt --Jim Evans 22:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Trougnouf 14:13, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

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

review

•  Comment Please link the appropriate Commons category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Done Link added --Jim Evans (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment I don't know where you put the link, but I mean link it to your scope. Look at any other nomination on this page in edit mode to see how it's done. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Done Maybe now --Jim Evans (talk) 03:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Yep. Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:55, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
City National Bank Building (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peace lily -- Spathiphyllum.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Amazing

Hi Jim Evans coming across this and this image, I was wondering how you did that? Remarkable imo... Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what you are referring to as "that." I edited the picture in photoshop and (tell no one) I added the sky. The original picture had a blue sky but it didn't have enough snap for me so I replaced it. Apparently changing the sky is frowned on by Commons people. --Jim Evans (talk) 20:15, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much Jim Evans. I must admit, good job there, also the contours of the bird on the lighthouse. If you change something to the original image, why not simply add it to the file description? That would imo possibily avoid the frowning. Cheers. Lotje (talk) 09:46, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
National Biscuit Company Building (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Old Harris County Courthouse (Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hogg Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Support removed until the problem will be solved. --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment There is a real rebuild problem on the latest version, look at the note; the first seems the best. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:15, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment Does this fix the problem? --Jim Evans (talk) 02:08, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment Click on restore the version of March 5, 2019 and it will be perfect --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Done --Jim Evans (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Support OK now. --Palauenc05 (talk) 13:38, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Union Station (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
JW Marriott Hotel -- Downtown Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

@Ikan Kekek: Thanks for discovering I incorrectly identified this building originally. --Jim Evans (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment Sure thing. Your link isn't working properly, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
• Fixed
•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Moody Mansion.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment This is the reviewer's preferred view.
•  Support Best in scope, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment The change of sky is not very happy, and gives the image an artificial character. The original image would have been preferable.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Rosenberg Library.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:06, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Texas Company Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
George Sealy House, Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
First Evangelical Lutheran Church of Galveston, 1915 building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment I don't know what a Expression error: Unexpected < operator. is, and hence how to fix it. -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:25, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment You made mistakes in your appointment, be more careful and look at the "Date" field. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm sorry, but I can't figure out the error. I have looked at the Dates but they are added automatically -- I have no control over them. --Jim Evans (talk) 12:43, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
    • You are right the date is automatic; but why did you add the scope in the date? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:18, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
      •  Comment That did it. I have no idea how that happened Jim Evans (talk) 15:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
• Everything we write is remembered. The error is included in the first version of your appointment: you duplicated the scope in the date. But don't worry we all started in VI one day, and I still make mistakes! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:54, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:55, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
City National Bank (Galveston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Stowers Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nerium oleander peach.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
34 Edsel Ford Model 40 Special Speedster.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 10:44, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sweeney, Coombs, and Fredericks Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Fort Travis.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
United States Post Office, Custom House and Courthouse (Galveston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Michel B. Menard House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:51, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Eiband's.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Grace Episcopal Church (Galveston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
First Presbyterian Church, Galveston, Texas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Stout Scarab.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:53, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Bugatti Type 50 i - side view.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 15:11, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support we must add "side view" to have the pleasure of being able to label: the front and the rear. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Harris County Criminal Justice Center
.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:43, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 15:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
St. Josephs Church -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question How many Catholic churches are there in Galveston? Why not narrow the scope to this church? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:25, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done There are 7 Catholic churches in Galveston. Only three have photos on commons that I've found. Jim Evans (talk) 21:19, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope Thanks. I think that's the right move. In time, we can hope that all 7 will have photographs on Commons. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:23, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 15:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Frank B. Davison House (Facade - taken from 3rd Avenue).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It would be useful to reduce the scope to Facade or give the orientation of the shot to be able to promote, one day, the other aspects of this building. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Done
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 22:12, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Queen of Angels Church (Dickinson, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Star Drug Store.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I don't feel adamant about this, but I'm liking File:Star Drug Store -- Gaveston, Texas.jpg better because the signs are easier to see. What do you think? I won't insist on this and would be happy to hear your thoughts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I don't have a strong feeling. I chose this one for two reasons: it holds focus on the drug store where the other has the distraction of too much of the building on the left. It isn't possible to crop out that distraction without cropping too much of the awning. Also, because it has the old men sitting and visiting under the awning.

•  Support OK, we'll go with that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:53, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Melrose Apartment Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Only in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Frank B. Davison House (Southeast corner. Taken from 1st Street).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Eaton Memorial Chapel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Trinity Episcopal Church (Galveston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:39, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Trueheart Adriance Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I think the date confuses the issue because my first thought was "No way was that constructed in 2012". Without the date, it's clearly best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Done Date removed -- Jim Evans(talk) 11:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support as best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Galveston Orphans Home (Now houses The Bryan Museum, artifacts of the history of Texas and the American West).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Question Duplicate nomination? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
• Fixed I see. Yes, I removed it. I was testing something and somehow it must have gotten saved.

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:19, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

File:1900 Storm Memorial 2.jpg

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Galveston Hurricane of 1900 Plaques and Memorial.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:41, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
St. Paul's United Methodist Church (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Archangel Raphael Coptic Orthodox Church -- Houston, Clear Lake City, Texas (Entrance viewed from parking area).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Blue Bell Creameries (1932-33 Ford Delivery Truck).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Nice car, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment Isn't it nice. It's been refurbished by someone who knew what they were doing and (at least the outside - didn't try to look inside) was in immaculate condition when I was there.

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 21:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Life size logo at Blue Bell Creameries.jpg

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

review

•  Comment Too broad. Let's have a narrowly-defined scope that focuses only on this sculpture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment "Walking the Cow" seems to be the name of a song. "Life-size logo at Blue Bell Creameries" seems like a fine scope to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done Is there a way to delete a category? I'm reluctant to trash up the system with unused categories -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. I don't know about deleting categories. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:01, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 22:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Archangel Raphael Coptic Orthodox Church -- Houston, Clear Lake City, Texas (View from South East corner).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. I prefer the other one for the brighter light and cheerier clouds, but no reason to make an issue out of that kind of matter of taste. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment It makes a nicer picture (and larger image) if it weren't for the chain link enclosure on the left. Every time I look at the picture, all I can see is that chain link fence. -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

• Point well taken. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Mallory-Produce Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support This one is arguable because we see only part of the building, but it's useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I thought I would make us both more comfortable and withdraw the nomination but I can't figure out how -- Jim Evans (talk) 22:12, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Why withdraw? I think it's still useful enough to be a VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:13, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Landes McDonough House (Facade).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Gorgeous. Is File:Landes-McDonough House - SW Corner (6778458610).jpg the back? If so, I think this house merits front and back scopes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment I agree it's an amazing building --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Question That isn't my picture. Are you requesting I propose it? It's a shame it isn't a better image, and it's small. I don't push for large image sizes but it seems like they should at least fill a desktop monitor. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment I think it's big and useful enough as a thumbnail in online articles, which is all that VIs are recommended for. You don't have to nominate it, but I think it's worth leaving open a possibility of nominating that or another photo of the back as well as the front of this house. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Perfect now. If you can, take the photo on the other side! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Seconded! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Wilbur F. Cherry House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sylvan Beach Pavilion (taken from the west/inland side).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It is a very complex building with interesting architecture. A single view cannot understand its complexity. This is why it is useful to give the direction of the shot in the scope and to be able to label other images. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sylvan Beach Pavilion (Entrance).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Houston Fire Station No. 7 (Retired -- now Houston Fire Museum).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:51, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
St. Mary's Catholic Church (Brenham, Texas) (With Bell Tower).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment There are two problems. The clipping of the upper part of the bell tower is bad with a piece of blue sky remaining, the change of sky is too visible. Maybe you could replace the original version. The second point is simpler you could give the meaning of the shot in the scope or reduce it to "Bell tower" because this is the only image that shows it in full. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm sorry, but I don't understand "clipping of the upper part of the bell tower"? Are you are referring to the sunlight glinting off of the top of the bell tower? It's in the original image. If you're referring to my hasty edit. It was because I felt this would never make a nice image. I have cleaned up the interface with the sky. However, I don't understand how one could see these issues in the small review image shown here. The review instructions say "it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters" I read somewhere even cellphone images are acceptable here. -- Jim Evans (talk) 14:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Well I see you understood, because you correct it. There remains the problem of the scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Houston Fire Station Nr. 3.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 07:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Galveston's 61 Street Fishing Pier.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Here too there are big problems related to the change of sky. It is advisable to pour the initial version. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment This [4] is the original image. I mention again the instruction on how to review images for this forum, On the review page the image is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.. If this instruction is obsolete it should be removed. -- Jim Evans (talk) 20:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment You may like the reworked image better -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:11, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    •  Support That's exactly what needs to be done. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:50, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Ashton Villa.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:23, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Galveston Railroad Museum (Train Station Lobby with white passengers waiting}.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment File:Santa Fe Union Station -- Interior Lobby.jpg is not as high-quality but more complete, so why isn't it more useful in scope? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm confused. File:Santa Fe Union Station -- Interior Lobby.jpg is the image I nominated? -- Jim Evans (talk) 08:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support No, I'm the one who was confused. Sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:39, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Cullen Center (500 Jefferson Building).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 22:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment Problem of perspective distortion; the lower part must appear perfectly horizontal. Reality is not respected, the image cannot be eligible for VI. This can be corrected. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Better?
    •  Support excellent --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Galveston Railroad Museum (Once the Santa Fe Union Station).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:12, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Houston National Bank Building (Is Houston's Islamic Da'wah Center today).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Certainly useful. It looks like its current name is Islamic Da'wah Center, so should we use that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'd say no. It only became used as an Islamic Center in 2002 after a basketball player bought it. The building, under this name, is listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places [5]. That's why I photographed it. -- Jim Evans (talk) 22:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment You didn't understand what I meant (because I wasn't clear enough): I mean to use Islamic Da'wah Center in parentheses only. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment I see. That's fine. Here's how I would do it. -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Useful and nice. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:54, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Kennedy Bakery.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:55, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Houston Cotton Exchange.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:56, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Brenham Heritage Museum.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Bolivar Ferry.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 01:40, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Hermann Park Golf Course (Original Clubhouse).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 21:14, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
USS Lexington Museum - Views from water.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 21:13, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
The Sheridan Apartments.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I'm having trouble picking between this photo and the HDR photo. Would you like to make an argument that could help me decide? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment Again, I still don't have a good feel for the criteria here. Re: the HDR photo. It's overexposed. The perspective is awful. It doesn't show the side of the building well. The power lines are distracting. All-in-all, IMO, it's just not as representative. -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:19, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope per above. Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:44, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
House at 2428 Postoffice Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Only in Scope —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 22:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope and very well composed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:13, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Building at 1921-1921 One-Half Avenue D, Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Landes McDonough House (Southwest Corner).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hagemann Cobb House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The sky is a disaster we must find an earlier version where it was natural. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Question By "disaster" are you referring to the digital noise? -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:36, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Perfect you understand, the sky is now acceptable. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
The Pix Building -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
U.S. National Bank Building -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Galveston, Houston & Henderson (GH&H) Freight Depot -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Texas State Hotel.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:16, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment The perspective seems weird on this. The second half of the building seems to be rotated at an awkward angle; in fact, I thought it was a reflection of the first portion of the building seen in the glass windows behind it. I checked on Google Street View and it seems like there's not a lot of room to back up in this location, but could there be a way to make the building look "normal"? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:42, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment I'm sorry, I'm not seeing what you're seeing. The right-hand tower is not a reflection, it's real. All photographs of tall buildings shot from this close have distortions you're not conscious of when actually looking at them. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

 Oppose No —Percival Kestreltail is right it is not the reality it is easy to go and check on google map. The two buildings are identical and have the same orientation, which is not the case in the image. If our brain changes perspective, it does so linearly for the whole landscape. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment Almost all of my building pictures are shot from a corner view so one can see both the side and front of the building. A straight on shot of most buildings does not show the entire structure. The reason the right hand picture is smaller is because it is further away. Here is the Google Maps Street view of the building [[6]]. I do not consider it a better representation of the building. Beyond that I refer you to my remarks on the Melrose Building. -- Jim Evans (talk) 14:21, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment Perhaps you will like this edit better, perhaps not. There are limits to this before other perspective misrepresentations occur. I had not noticed before but your viewer deforms the image. In this case it makes the closer tower look much wider than the other. You will have to go directly to the image page to see it properly.[7] -- Jim Evans (talk) 14:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment In a successful photomontage, we cannot see the different borrowings; That is not the case here. But as Percival suggested it looks 'more normal'. I see the corrective work done and the goodwill. I withdraw the negative vote, but this work must be done before the appointment and with more rigor. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 500 Jefferson St. Building.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 IMHO a 100% perspective correction should be applied here, instead of 90%. Furthermore there is barrel distortion, too. --Poco a poco 12:35, 23 December 2020 (UTC)  Done I wish you guys would rethink the requirement to make the sides of tall buildings vertical even when it makes the top balloon out.  Support Agree but still an acceptable ballooning IMHO --Poco a poco 20:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Texas Heroes Monument (Galveston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:38, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Courtlandt Place, Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Maybe restrict the scope to the historical plaque? At review size, we can't see much in this photo, but we can in File:CP West Gate1 West gate at Courtlandt Place, Houston, Texas.jpg. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:38, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

 Question I'm not clear on what your are suggesting. File:CP West Gate1 West gate at Courtlandt Place, Houston, Texas.jpg is not my image. Are you suggesting I withdraw my image and propose it instead? If you're suggesting I post a closeup of the Texas historical marker, I have been forbidden to submit pictures of Texas historical markers to Commons on the basis that they're copyrighted. I don't know if that prohibition applies when the marker is incidental to the image, like this one. I'm happy to let you Oppose this picture or withdraw it. -- Jim Evans (talk) 04:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment OK, first, there's nothing preventing you from nominating someone else's image if you think it's best in scope, so I don't understand the relevance of that. Second, I'm not suggesting you make your photo a closeup. Do you have any questions about what I posted above? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:45, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment I would like to withdraw my nomination -- now if I can just figure out how, again. You see this all the time with images on the National Register, but I've never understood how one picture can represent an entire Historic District.

★ 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:
House at 2017-2023 Avenue I, Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Southwestern Bell Main Office -- Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sealy Hutchings House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The category is not valid. The category must really exist and not be created for the circumstance. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:05, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment OK now. I corrected --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment I remind you I wrote for your guidance on this very question. I explained I was running out of images with another in the same category saying, "To submit [one of these] I must create a category, then this picture will be the only one in it. . . . My hobby is photographing historic objects, places & buildings so I have many similar images. Essentially all of them will be on the US National Register of Historic places or are Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks or Historic places designated by the Texas Historical Commission. Should I forget about submitting them?" To which your replied, "It is useful to create a category where, for the moment, it will be the only one. But that's not a big deal . . ." You can find this exchange here [8]. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Only in Scope I'm surprised that there are no other photos of this building, or of many others that you have submitted photos for. All seem to be relatively accessible and noteworthy enough to have many other photos. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment Your category was not attached to the category database. I corrected it. You have manipulated the chonological order of the comments. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Scanlan Building -- Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and a nice photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hermann Park Municipal Golf Clubhouse -- Houston.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. --Tournasol7 17:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Galveston Immigration Stations.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment it looks like there is a categorization error. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment I don't know what to do here. Later known as “The Ellis Island of the West, in the the 1840s - 1920s Galveston was a major immigration port before Ellis Island even existed [9]. This building was build as and used as an immigration and deportee-staging facility until about 1940 when it was converted for use to a U.S. Customs Office. No category exists for its original use/purpose. Others referred to it and created the Category Custom House which is correct for its later use. Edited to add: an alternative is for me to create a new Category where this would be the only image. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment Geocode is missing. --Palauenc05 ([[User talk:Palauenc05|⧼T<span class="template-ping">@Jim Evans: </span>alkpagelinktext⧽]]) 09:16, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

  Fixed Sorry about that. Must have been a slip between the cup and the lip. -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:27, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment OK for this issue. However, I won't support it until Archaeo's point is settled. --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:03, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Question I don't know what's needed to resolve the issue. Do you (or anyone) have suggestions? -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:01, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment It's listed on the National Register of Historic Places as "U.S. Customhouse". Doesn't that establish clearly which name the category and scope should be under? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

• Fixed Monsieur Archaeodontosaurus was correct. I think he was testing me and I finally tumbled to the problem. -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Question What happened to the other photos that were in the previous scope? They were in Houston, right, that was the problem? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment @Ikan Kekek: Yes. People add categories to my pictures. Someone had erroneously added that one and when I went there it looked like the same building with different paint. -- Jim Evans (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:41, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Houston Bar Center Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful, and what a radical building for the 1st decade of the 20th century! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
James L. Autry House (Courtlandt Place, Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:43, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Cheek Neal Coffee Company Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

★ 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:
Camron Iron Works.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. No way to photograph the whole building, I guess? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment I don't remember anymore. But, just speculating -- it's a very long building & I couldn't move further to the right in order to get the facade plus the full side. I could have made a panorama, but either I didn't think of it at the time or assumed that would make an odd bulge toward the camera in the middle of the long side of the building. (Also, I was sorely unimpressed with the building.:) ) -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:49, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I understand that. It's not as beautiful as many of the houses you've been shooting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:29, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Armand Bayou Nature Center (Tidal Stream of Armand Bayou).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Can one picture stand for the whole nature center, in your opinion? How should we judge which one is most useful? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment I don't know how answer the question. Armand Bayou Nature Center is the largest urban nature center in the U.S. It has a wide array of different features, no one of which can represent the entire Center. You get a feel for the diversity from the pictures in the category I linked to. It was the only category I found that relates to the nature canter. My picture is of Armand Bayou itself. Which is part, I guess the primary part, of the center. But, it's a very long and winding bayou -- no one picture could represent all of the bayou alone. Comment edited to add: This YouTube video gives a pretty good overview of the entire center [10] -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment I suppose restricting the scope to the bayou might be useful? Dunno. I'll have a look at the YouTube video later. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment Amazing how the narrator says Native American tribes "had become extinct from the area", like they were animals and the "extinction" just happened by itself. Anyway, he also mentions 3 different ecosystems, so I would suggest that we would want to leave room for a "best of scope" in each one: (1) coastal tall grass prairie; (2) tidal stream of Armand Bayou; (3) coastal flatwoods forest. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:59, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support as useful in new scope, but it's better to use the standard procedure to change your scope and then ping whoever has voted or commented on the nomination in the prior scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

 Question I didn't realize there's a standard procedure. Could you give me a link to it? -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

See "Changes in scope during the review period" above the nominations section. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I found it -- thanks. I read everything I found before I first posted here and vaguely remember that but at the time I didn't even understand what Scope was. It was all a lot to absorb. I tried doing what was asked but it didn't work right [11], so I removed it. -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Armand Bayou Nature Center (Tallgrass Prairie).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Armand Bayou Nature Center (Entrance Sculpture).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
River Oaks Garden Club Forum of Civics.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Myers-Spalti Manufacturing Plant.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Medical Towers -- Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, but I'm wondering what happened to the spire of the O'Quinn Tower. Based on this Google Street View, there seems to be a lot of space in this location to back up... —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Maria Flake Boswell Home for Old Women.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Same problems as usual; Houston and Galveston are quite obviously very hospitable places for vibrant trees. But certainly useful as the unique photo in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

There's a parking lot on the right (you can see a piece of the concrete in the bottom right). There's a better shot from there. But this was a Sunday and the place was fenced and gate locked. I was shooting through a wrought iron gate and not a good angle. -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Saint Elizabeth's Hospital -- Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Too much distortion on the right side looks at the note --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment @Archaeodontosaurus: Good point. Image has been cropped. -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

 Support OK is better. If you can: change the sky that you damaged by removing the branch. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:56, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
DePelchin Faith Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment It's difficult to get a picture of this building. It's fenced and the gate is locked, but the main problem is it's hidden by many trees. . . . I don't know why this category doesn't link-up. A search for it works. I did not create the category, I just used it.

•  Comment The reason it red-links is that there is no such category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

 Comment But, if you click on the red link it goes to the Category?? -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Odd, clicking directly from here works, but when I searched for the category, it didn't come up. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support Useful. The link is no longer red. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orchid cactus -- Epiphyllum hybrid 'Unforgettable'.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. --Podzemnik 05:09, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
1938 Schlumberger building in Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Holy Trinity Church (Houston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, considering File:TrinityEpiscopalChurchMidtownHoustonTX.JPG by comparison. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Governor Ross Sterling Mansion (view from street).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment The mansion faces the water

•  Question Why did you darken it from File:Govenor Ross Sterling Mansion.jpg? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I think is was the other way 'round. The picture you refer to was uploaded later and so I had lightened it. I didn't notice that when I requested deletion of the one you refer to. I probably lightened the building because it's a little too dark in the current one. -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:40, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment OK, well my point is that I like the brighter photo better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done You're right. -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:28, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Congregation Beth Israel (Houston) -- Facade.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Restrict the scope to "facade"? File:Temple Beth Israel (HDR).jpg shows more of the building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Isaiah P. Walker House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The category appears to be completely empty! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Thanks.

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amaryllis -- Hippeastrum correiense.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 --Michielverbeek 16:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Dr. Frederick K. and Lucy Adelaide Fisher House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I would prefer a picture that shows more of the "front" facade and less of the tree. Do you have any other pictures of this house that shows more of the front? Provisional  Oppose for the moment. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I have no other views of this house -- Jim Evans (talk) 04:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Okay, I've crossed my oppose. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
First Evangelical Lutheran Church (Galveston, Texas) -- 1957.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment @Percival Kestreltail: I needed to make a change to the scope. This church has two buildings in Galveston. This is the current building built in 1957 but the congregation has an older one with the same name (on the same street) built somewhere around 1915. It's my understanding you must confirm your support after any Scope change. -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:10, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sears, Roebuck and Company Warehouse and Service Center -- Houston, Texas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Adriance Springer House (Northwest corner).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

 Question @Archaeodontosaurus: Did you intend to Support? -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:23, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment He has made several votes without using the template recently, perhaps his {} keys are stuck! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Albertson Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Only in scope, so best. Is this the best possible angle for a photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Probably should have shot this on head-on. As I remember, trees prevent shooting from the right. -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:37, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment If you have a chance to get a more complete picture of the house, do an MVP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Adriance Springer House (Northeast corner).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment if you add to the scope the orientation of the photograph, the two images that you made are eligible, because they are complementary and allow you to better understand the building. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:45, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Archaeodontosaurus:

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:43, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Campbell Home -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Baden-Sproule House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Only in Scope —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

volcano

Do you want to tell me who better i nominate this image?https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nevado_de_Colima.JPG --Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 04:39, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Whether you nominate it or not you can change the picture. No necesariamente. Ya sea que lo nomines o no, puedes cambiar la imagen. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Best Lucas House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 08:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
C. F. Marschner Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Best in scope, but why the dashes in the scope and category name? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Good point. Changed. It takes to long to explain here how that happened. If you want I'll explain on your talk page. -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support, but now I'm curious about the dashes! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Boddeker House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 08:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Franklin-Wandless House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and nice to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Davidson Penland House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I would prefer an image like this one that shows the sloping roof. Do you have any other pictures of this building that might show the roof? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:39, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment No, I have no other shots of this house. I rarely take head-on shots of buildings. -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:11, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

• Okay, in that case I  Support this as best in scope. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 05:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Garten Verein.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
George Seeligson Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and a good photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Grover-Chambers House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support What great documentation in the file description! It's a shame the trees block more of a view (though of course the trees are nice), but certainly useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:43, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
George Fox House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Widows Walk (roof).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Frederich Erhard House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Good image, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Julius H. Ruhl Residence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:54, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hawes Summer Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:48, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Heidenheimer-Hunter Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Henry C. Henck, Jr House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Isabella Offenbach Maas Residence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Isaac H. and Henrietta Kempner House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Hutchings House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Yes Ikan, trees. Houston & Galveston's climate is classified as humid subtropical with tropical influences. It's part of the USDA Plant hardiness zone. So, trees/shrubs grow robustly here. This house was fenced & gated so I'm shooting from outside the fence. (post, lower left)

•  Support Useful. Jim, I used to live in Malaysia, so I understand what it's like to live in a place with luxuriant vegetation. That doesn't make it less of a problem for photos of buildings to show nothing but vegetation, but enough of this building is visible for this photo to be useful as a photo of the building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
J. F. Smith House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
James N. Davis House - Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment What's up with the sky in the background? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:29, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

   Comment I guess you mean that flat white cloud. I really don't know. -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment You don't know how to manage the skies: don't touch them! it will be simpler. You devalue your work. It would have been wiser to correct the perspective. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:38, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Jackie Andrews Private School.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
James S. Waters House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Clarke Jockusch Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. Really lovely building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I would have loved to live in this house, but these rambling old homes are expensive to maintain and the owner let this one fall into ill repair. Look at the second floor balusters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim Evans (talk • contribs) 11:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I see that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
John Smith House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:29, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
John M. Jones House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Lasker Home for Children.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
The Maas House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment I like this color scheme— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim Evans (talk • contribs) 3:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
John and Eliza Hertford House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! James S. Waters House -- Galveston.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 15:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Lockhart House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Magale Building -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful, but is the scope the building the furthest to the right or the one in the middle? It could be both, if you like, but please specify which is which in your file description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done -- Jim Evans (talk) 07:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Maud Moller House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Menard Ganter House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful, but do an MVP if you take a photo that doesn't have a lens flare; I find that distracting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amaryllis -- Hippeastrum correiense 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  Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 05:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lion of St Mark outside Bishop's Palace -- Galveston, Texas.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. Minor traces of chroma noise, and the background is very dark, but considered as a photo of the lion statue it is OK. --Aristeas 09:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Miller-Brautigam Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Do you have an angle that shows more of the indented part of the front facade? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:34, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
• With a less fanciful sky --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Yes, I'd also prefer just the natural sky, even if it's a "boring" one. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:34, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

• I assume you mean you want to see more of the porch. I have such a picture but it is head on and a tree obscures the beveled corner of the house. In this view you can see enough of the porch to know what it's like and and the beveled corner and also see how the house is indented in the rear. In my opinion, this is the more informative/better view. -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

• Very well, I  Support this as best in scope. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:00, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Jean Lafitte Hotel, Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:36, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose The image is too degraded, only the first version is acceptable if it is retroverted I could vote in favor. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Good catch. Corrections made. Thanks -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment OK now. All this work has to be done before appointments ...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 23:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Daniel Webster Kemper House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Lion of St Mark outside Bishop's Palace.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Lion de st mark is not a registered trademark, but it is the subject of strict rules which you can find on the excellent atticle here Leone di San Marco. What you are showing is more of a Griffin. In fact it is neither one nor the other. This says it is perhaps not you who made a mistake. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Info I'm definitely NOT an informed person on the subject, but this figure is at the entry to the Catholic Bishop's Palace (probably the most famous building in Galveston) File:Bishops Palace Galveston 2009.jpg. This indicates it's a Christian symbol. Also, the article you reference (English Version) says "In British heraldry, "Lion of St. Mark" is commonly used to refer to all winged lions. These figures are depicted . . . more commonly, sejant" --Jim Evans (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support For a Venetian it is not a lion of St Mark but I want it, that it is, for the rest of the world. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
E.S. Levy Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Oppose You cannot label images that distort reality. The lower right part is completely abherent. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment @Archaeodontosaurus: I must have been rushed that day. Tried to remove cars and did a sloppy job. Maybe you'll like this redo better. --Jim Evans (talk) 15:16, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I don't think it's necessary to have so much of the side, a view like this would have been better. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:05, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Ok now. Your modifications are good. Stay as close as possible to reality; it's easier. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:40, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Question @Jim Evans: I noticed that you also have another file named E.S. Levy Building but shows a different building: File:E.S. Levy Building -- Galveston.jpg. Are there two buildings with this name? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
McKinney-McDonald House During restoration.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and a very pretty house. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment They completed the restoration and I'm hoping to get a new picture next time I'm in Galveston. -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment In that case, perhaps the scope should be modified to indicate that this picture shows the house before the restoration. When you get a new picture we can promote that to VI as well. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Yes, I agree, if there's a recognizable difference to the exterior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Ikan Kekek:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Merimax Building -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support 1st time, there's another photo in the scope! But I think this one is BIS. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Rosenberg Library Statue of Henry Rosenberg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Mosquito Fleet Berth, Pier 19 Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Robinson Building (Galveston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Scottish Rite Cathedral (Galveston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:43, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Model Laundry (Galveston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Only a single image in a recently created scope. Need more images to judge which is most valuable. --Tagooty (talk) 16:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

• Struck oppose as discussed on a preceding nomination. --Tagooty (talk) 08:25, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Best in scope. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Col. Hugh B. and Helen Moore House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment The Category was created on 17 Jan 2021, it contains only a single image. How do we judge that this single image is the best in the scope? It is desirable to have a number of images in the scope. For a house, showing the various angles, some of the important rooms inside, etc. --Tagooty (talk) 06:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Adding oppose so the image does not get promoted until the above comment is discussed. I'm open to changing my vote later. --Tagooty (talk) 14:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

• Struck per my comment in the preceding nomination. --Tagooty (talk) 04:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Per my remarks on the preceding nomination. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. Tagooty, if it's the only image in scope, it's the best in scope. Of course it's also the worst in scope. :-) But the only real question is, is it a useful image in a useful scope? If it is, it should be supported. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Archaeodontosaurus, Tagooty, —Percival Kestreltail, Ikan Kekek Have you guys not seen the very poor quality cloning on the right of the house? Also there is perspective distortion which could easily be rectified. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I don't have QIC standards for photos nominated at VIC. I appreciate your suggesting improvements, but I think this photo is quite sufficient in quality at review size to be useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I checked the location on Google Street View and it doesn't appear that the cloning distorts the reality. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:12, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Jacobs Home -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Numerous aberrations; this part of the image must be removed. QI is too lax a competition. We must be careful that VI does not become it. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Here we go again.

• The rules for Valued Images state: "The image must look good on-screen at the review size (e.g. 480 × 360 pixels for a standard 4:3 landscape image)." Also, " . . .bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters." (emphasis added)

I cannot see the problems you call out on the review page image. But, even if others can, they're inconsequential.

If the rules are not correct, they should be changed.

• Now you are saying Valued Images must meet or exceed Quality Image standards. The tenor of the description of Valued Images suggests that kind of rigor is not intended.

• I've been unable to find a statement of the objective/purpose of Valued Images. I have assumed it is to highlight clear, representative images of subjects/objects on Commons. Yet you continue to focus on minor anomalies in the surrounds -- those parts/aspects of the overall image that have nothing to do with the subject of the "Scope. " Somewhere the intent/objective/purpose of the Valued Review concept should be stated. And, if the objective is what I have assumed, unless they are obviously distracting, the incidental surrounds of the subject should have nothing to do with its review. If the subject is represented better than other available images that should be the deciding factor. -- Jim Evans (talk) 22:55, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Quality is acceptable for VI in my opinion. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose This part of the image distorts reality and depreciates the value of the label. It is easy to remove it. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Surely useful, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Archaeo: disturbing elements on the right. Easy to remove by cropping it a little. --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

• The image is OK now. I scratch my oppose vote although I don't quite appreciate stubbornness. --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Oppose The Category was created on 17 Jan 2021, it contains only a single image. How do we judge that this single image is the best in the scope? It is desirable to have a number of images in the scope. --Tagooty (talk) 14:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment If there is only a single image, then it is necessarily the best in scope. Of course, we must also consider that it is an accurate representation of the subject before promoting it, and I think that the "aberrated" part of this image is not enough to render it inaccurate. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
• A single image is both best and worst in the scope! With a global set of reviewers most of whom have never seen this building, how can we judge if a single image is a valuable portrayal of the building? Since the Category has been created a few days ago, there has not been time for a corpus of images to accumulate. We are in effect relying on the judgement of the photographer that the one image added to this category is the most valuable depiction. --Tagooty (talk) 16:01, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment You are right, but valued images are supposed to be the most valuable image on Commons, not the most valuable image possible. With all due respect —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment No one is wrong in this matter. What is required is a little goodwill to support everyone's work by listening to each other. We love VI, that's what brings us together. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Yes, I agree with Archaeodontosaurus! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:25, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment À propos Archaeo's point: I think it's a general principle on Wikis to assume good faith if there's no good reason to suspect bad faith. Similarly, if you haven't seen a house but it's a landmarked house and the photo looks useful, it would stand to reason that you should support the nomination. When I haven't seen something in the flesh, I may question aspects of the scope or whether the photo represents the scope well, but if the photo looks reasonably good, the scope seems clear and logical and the photo clearly represents the scope, I support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks for the explanations. I've been participating in VI for only a few months. I read the 6 VI criteria Commons:Valued image criteria. One criterion is that the scope should be sufficiently generic. To me, this implies that the scope should have a number of images in Commons. If the scope is a Category, this "is intended to group related pages and media" Commons:Categories. Thus a Category with a single image is not a "sufficiently generic" scope.
  "A valued image is considered to be the most valued illustration of its kind by the Commons community" Commons:Valued images. This again highlights the selection out of many.
  I am quite impressed by Jim Evans' work. He has about 85% of his 900 images actually used, which is remarkably high! I'm sure that many of his Galveston nominations would make VI in competition with other images of the same subjects. If Commons were a guild, images by such a skilled artisan could be accepted sight unseen. However, Commons is a democratic organisation with eligibility criteria for voting. I believe that waiting until the scope has a group of images, or the single image is used in several Wiki projects, will enhance the prestige of VI.
  In any case, being relatively new to this forum, I accept the explanations of several veterans and hence strike out my opposition to this nomination. --Tagooty (talk) 04:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I'm glad we could reach an agreement. Everyone has different interpretations of the VI criteria and contributions by new participants are welcomed. The VI criteria are sometimes vague so it is up to us to discuss and decide whether a nomination meets all of them. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

* Sorry, I don't understand the problem. Why not cropping it a little and thus remove the flaws? I'd be glad to support the nomination. Besides, there is a black gap on the bottom, right. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Oppose Not VI as we cannot accept such poorly-executed cloning. The author can easily re-edit. Fails criteria "reasonable technical quality and standard" and "No distracting, irrelevant elements". Should not have been promoted QI by User:MB-one. I guess they didn't look closely enough. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment @Archaeodontosaurus, Palauenc05, and Charlesjsharp: I have taken the liberty of cropping out the bad part on the right as well as a black patch that was on the bottom. @Jim Evans: I hope you don't mind, please feel free to revert if you would prefer your old version. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support OK for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:27, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
M. W. Shaw Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Ashbel Smith Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question What about File:Ashbel Smith Building UTMB Galveston.jpg? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment They're similar. My comments are: It has uncorrected keystoning and it's a small image (702 × 453) so if a reasonable size Archaeodontosaurus might see flaws -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
• However I noticed that you cropped out a building that's next to this one, so I will have to provisionally  Oppose on the grounds that the image does not depict the reality. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Good point. I agree: Please restore the building. It'll still be best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Done @Kestreltail: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim Evans (talk • contribs) 10:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Thanks, I've removed my oppose vote. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Steffens Drewa House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:45, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Poole-Parker House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Do they list properties in Texas? How do we know if this is notable? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:59, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Info You can check this link. Like tears in rain ^{-_-} 17:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Info This is a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Stringfellow Orchards (Stringfellow's Home).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support What's the event going on? There's a lot of people in the picture. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 05:13, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per above. If you happen to go back when there are no or fewer people in front of the house, do a MVR. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:23, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment . . Percival -- Samuel Collins III, a black gentleman from the area, restored this Confederate veteran's home. As I recall, this was the dedication ceremony. I think there's an annual Juneteenth celebration here now. -- Jim Evans (talk) 10:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks for the info. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sweeney-Royston House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Quality image

Unfortunately I don't remember what you're talking about; could you tell me more? Nyttend (talk) 13:23, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I see now that you didn't nominate your picture. It was nominated for Valued [Images https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Hillard_Apartments_-_panoramio.jpg] -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:34, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Powhatan and Mattie Wren House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:40, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Office where the Zimmermann Telegram was relayed to Mexico.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Definitely a good building to nominate, but it is not the telegram and instead a building where the telegram was intercepted and relayed, so please tweak your nomination accordingly to represent what we're looking at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Great. Superb nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Your latest VI nomination of Albertson Home

Hello Jim Evans:

I see three issues with your latest VI nomination:

• A click on the scope takes me to a different page than the Albertson Home category page. It’s just a technical fault in the HTML code. Try this (HTML code is in Edit screen).

scope=Albertson Home

• “Reshot per request here” did not have a link on “here” so I could not link to the previous conversation.
• You have a number of images with VI ratings and this may be something you know. I believe your latest image should be entered in the MVR section, not New VI Nominations.

You can have multiple images in a category with QI ratings but there is only one Valued Image for each defined scope in Commons. So, if there is an existing image in the scope of “Albertson Home” (usually but not necessarily defined by unique category) that already has a VI rating, a second image would not be placed in “New valued image nominations”. Instead, it would compete in Most Valued Review (see scope definition, info on MVR above and “Pending Most valued review candidates” section below). Essentially, MVR is a Valued Image competition where a nominator is saying that their new nominated image is “more valuable” to Commons than the existing image with the VI rating. You make the proposal in Most Valued Review and if there is consensual agreement, the VI rating transfers from the existing VI image holder to yours. In the end, only one image in a defined scope has a VI rating.
From my observation, an MVR challenge is not for the faint of heart.
Unfortunately, there currently is no example in the MVR section for you to see.
As the existing VI image is also yours, you would be challenging yourself.

Best,
Gordon
--GRDN711 (talk) 02:50, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for all that. I vaguely remembered there was something one had to do different, but couldn't remember what. -- Jim Evans (talk) 03:06, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Old High School Santa Fe, Texas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
The Cottage - Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sonnentheil Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful, lovely and I think this one is probably a QI (I'd vote for it) if nominated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Reedy Chapel A. M. E. Church.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Endeavour Condominiums.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Nice, a skyscraper nomination! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 23:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
T. J. and Mary Lelia Dick House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Quigg Baulard Cottage.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Saturn V rocket on display at Johnson Space Center.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:59, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Building at 1925–1927 Market-Street (Galveston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. What's producing the purple light in the corner? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I don't know. It's just the sky as is was. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

*  Comment No, it is an artifact linked to the lens, which could have been removed, the mediocre quality serves the label. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Congregation B'nai Israel Synagogue (Galveston, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks for taking the photo! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
The Italian Vault.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful, pretty and some great history. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
The Cradle -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Heidenheimer Bros. Marine Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cedar Bayou Masonic Lodge No. 321, A. F. & A. M.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. --Tournasol7 07:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Trube Castle.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Thomas Chubb House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Stringfellow Orchards.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Much less cluttered. Rodhullandemu (talk) 07:17, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Super! Much better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Scores:

Stringfellow Orchards 2.jpg: +2
Stringfellow Orchards.jpg: -1 
=>
File:Stringfellow Orchards 2.jpg:Promoted
File:Stringfellow Orchards.jpg: Declined.

--Jim Evans (talk) 17:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Wesley Tabernacle United Methodist Church.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Wegner House -- Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Did you notice the dog on the porch at the top of the steps? -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
William and Adele Skinner House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
McKinney-McDonald House with restoration continuing 10 years later.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment If you judge that this image is more relevant than the one that is already promoted in VI, you must go to Pending Most valued review candidates --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

 Question I remembered in the past if the Scope had a different name it didn't require MVR? -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:42, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment This is not a problem of scope but a problem of substance. We are not going to make an appointment for each month of work.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment But in this case it's 10 years of work... —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment @Kestreltail: @Ikan Kekek: Apparently I can't vote so will someone choose the best of these. (namely, this one) -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Yes, I agree that this one is better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Scores:

McKinney-McDonald House.jpg: +1
McKinney-McDonald House, Galveston.jpg: -1 
=>
File:McKinney-McDonald House.jpg: Promoted
File:McKinney-McDonald House, Galveston.jpg: Declined.

--Jim Evans (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Entrance to Stringfellow Orchards.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment The image is very degraded in quality by the inopportune computer processing. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Stringfellow's Barn at Stringfellow Orchards.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Is this barn a listed landmark? Also, please eliminate the COM:OVERCAT. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Stringfellow Orchards is on the U.S. National register of historical places and this barn is part of it. I have tried to clarify that by adding the NRHP to the image page. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Thanks. I find this barn nondescript, but the photo could be useful. But let's discuss categories a little more. Why do you think Category:Horticulture is useful? Isn't that overcat for the category of the orchard? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:26, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I find Categories confused. Some people want one thing some want another. I'm not sure they serve much of a purpose. The difference I see is an orchard can simply be trees, e.g. an apple orchard, whereas horticulture is the the science and art of growing fruits & vegetables which is what Stringfellow was famous for. -- Jim Evans (talk) 04:27, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment That seems like more of an explanation for a Wikipedia article than a category for a photo of a barn. Can we see horticulture in the photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment The scope seems well chosen to me; on the other hand we would have seen having a very beautiful image if you did not persist in degrading them: the clipping of the sky is bad and the sky itself is oversaturated. Do not touch the images until you have mastered the technique. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Fixed clipping

 Comment Just to be clear, the sky was added, but it's a real sky. It was only lightened to avoid a gloomy picture and now the clipping has been muted. No increased saturation or other processing was applied to the sky.

 Comment It is very easy to see the pieces of the initial sky in the left corner, you will have a hard time arguing that there is no image overprocessing. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:37, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Those splotches are not the original sky. The original sky was totally blown out white. The splotches happened somehow I don't understand when adding the sky. I have redone the image. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support It's better, there is work and goodwill. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Someone Flickr washed your photo

Hey Jim, I found one of the photos you had submitted to VIC on Flickr, someone had released it into the public domain: https://www.flickr.com/photos/149130767@N03/50760595206. I didn't check but they might have more of your pictures. You should probably report this to Flickr. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

<smile> That's my Flickr page. I use the name Shurly Shirly or jim jim on Flickr. Commons & Wikipedia are the only places on the web where I use my real name. -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I thought that might be a possibility but decided it would be best to tell you anyway! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Pillot House in Sam Houston Park.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
San Felipe Cottage in Sam Houston Park.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Side view of Clayton House, Houston's Genealogy Library.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Oppose Doesn't show enough of the front... could be best in scope for a side view. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Changed the scope, does that help? -- Jim Evans (talk) 03:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Yes, it does. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Auditorium Hotel (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clayton House Houston's Genealogy Library.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. --LexKurochkin 15:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Maud Moller House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Much improved. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:08, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Maud Moller House 2.jpg: +1 Maud Moller House.jpg: 0

=>
File:Maud Moller House.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Maud Moller House 2.jpg: Promoted.
--Jim Evans (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Jim Evans (talk) 18:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Cedar Bayou Masonic Lodge No. 321.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Only in scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Old Baytown Post Office.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 15:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Holcombe House (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Fondren Mansion.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Front of James Marion West mansion.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment This grand Texas ranch house was razed a short time ago, so no longer exists. [[12]] I don't know if it is accepted. At the end it was sold to Houston Rockets (basketball) legend Hakeem Olajuwon who tried to make an elite clothing store of it. I worked with a committee trying to save it but profit won (surprise) -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Sure. I think "front" and "rear" subscopes are justified. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Houston Light Guard Armory.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 18:27, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Galveston Immigration Stations.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  Oppose Insufficient quality. Excesive denoise --Wilfredor 18:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)  Question It looks more like compression fragments to me. Starting at 200%, is this the highest quality jpeg export? --Etaped 22:03, 11 February 2021 (UTC)  Question I've reverted to the earlier version. If the problem is still there please explain where to look and what to look for as I don't understand what you two are seeing. -- Jim Evans 13:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC) In the current image there is a lot of noise or artifacts, when you try to solve it by applying denoise, it is applied excessively causing loss of details in some areas such as trees and grass --Wilfredor 15:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment Thank you. Because of the noise I was probably a little heavy handed and I would have never noticed the grass. I've given it another try. Tell me what you think -- Jim Evans 00:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)  Support Good quality. better now --Wilfredor 01:46, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Changing status to "supported"

How's it going, User:Jim Evans? I notice you're supporting some VIC nominees but not changing their status. You also need to change their status from "nominated" to "supported". I didn't know that at first, either.

Best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:06, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought that happened automatically, and why doesn't it? -- Jim Evans (talk) 16:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Images

Hi Jim Evans, thanks for your two support votes at VI. However, you have to change the status line into "|status= supported", otherwise the frame doesn't turn green. I've done it this time. As for your two pictures of Lambrecht's Artesian Well, I guess the view direction such as "southwest", "northeast" etc. is more common than "front" and "rear". Greetings --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, just now I saw that Ikan Kekek told you the same. Never mind. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Michel B. Menard House from North Front.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Please note that you have deleted the nominator field, the promotion will not be awarded to you.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Fixed

•  Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Rear of James Marion West mansion.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Moore Log House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Looks  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Blue Triangle Branch, Y.W.C.A. (Houston).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Pioneer Memorial Log House in Hermann Park.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Dedication Stone First Presbyterian Church, Galveston, Texas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:41, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Magnolia Brewery.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:20, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
General Sidney Sherman Memorial.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:18, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sanctuary of the First Presbyterian Church, Galveston, Texas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

• Incomplete though nice view, but  Best in Scope at this time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Howard Hughes Gravesite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Sweeny-Waddy Log Cabin.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. I'm thinking about the file description. Can we find a different expression than "with the help of slaves", keeping in mind that they didn't have a choice? "He had his slaves clear the land" or something? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope The description is fine in my opinion. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Lambrecht's Artesian Well from the south.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Lambrecht's Artesian Well from the north.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:54, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
George Sealy House, Galveston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Building is much more easily visible in this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Jim Evans (talk) 11:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Scores: Open-Gates-The George Sealy Mansion.jpg: +1 George Sealy Mansion.jpg: -1

=>
File:Open-Gates-The George Sealy Mansion.jpg: Promoted.
File:George Sealy Mansion.jpg: Declined.

--Jim Evans (talk) 11:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Galilee Missionary Baptist Church.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment This is not the church's first building (circa 1901) nor their second building (1910). This building is at a new location and built in 1968 -- Jim Evans (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Question Could you possibly take a photo of the whole exterior? It's a pity the steeple is cut, and I suppose the building continues some ways to the back. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
   Comment I have no current plans to be in that area -- Jim Evans (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I'll call it useful, but if you do get back there and take a more complete photo of the church, please do an MVR. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:55, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support The location isn't the best for taking a picture: see this Google Street View. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment We agree, the picture could be more representative. The picture was taken 9 years ago for an entirely different purpose. -- Jim Evans (talk) 03:38, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
French Home Trading Post.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
A replica of the Spindletop gusher.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:50, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Pecos River Bridge.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Imperial Sugar Company Refinery Southern View.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Why are you nominating a 2nd photo in a single scope? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment It's the same historical place shot from a different angle showing the entire plant as seen from across the street. -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment But you can't have two VIs for the same scope. Add the direction of the view for both nominations if you want to have them both to be considered. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support. Now please add the direction of view for the other photo of the refinery. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Imperial Sugar Company Refinery (view from the west).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Vote temporarily removed, pending the addition of the direction of view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Done @Ikan Kekek: I think you have to post a new review. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Sri Meenakshi Devasthanam Temple -- View of Gopura from the Courtyard.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Facade of Sri Meenakshi Devasthanam Temple.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support I've seen Hindu temples like this in Chicago and Boston too. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:46, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Sri Meenakshi Devasthanam Temple (eastern exposure).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Info No pun intended -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Question Very nice and certainly useful, but is this itself a temple, or is it a gate to the temple grounds, with this taller structure being the temple? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment You'll have to ask someone who understands Hindu Temples. Isn't the entire complex the Temple? -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I did some research. I can't say I'm 100% sure about this, nor about the distinction between a temple and a temple complex that contains multiple temples, but you appear to be right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Entrance to the Grand 1894 Opera House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Is that the entire exterior of the opera house, or is it only the entrance, as stated in one photo and w:Grand 1894 Opera House? Another way to ask the question is how many buildings does this photo show, and is the building that includes the entrance to the opera house only the opera house on the ground floor? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:10, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment It's the entrance. Scope changed to so indicate -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Burleson County Courthouse.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Grand 1894 Opera House from upper balcony.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
International & Great Northern Railroad Passenger Depot in Rockdale, Texas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:46, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Texas' First Rice Mill.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info Still in operation -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
• You've removed the post, it's possible and it's a good idea, but the reconstruction has to be done well and it's not. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Done I can't know what was behind the pole. I did what I could --Jim Evans (talk) 12:39, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Old Freestone Jail.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:56, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
The Manahan House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment it would be good to correct the house perspective error and desaturate the sky. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I wasn't sure what you meant by perspective error -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:15, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I corrected --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Fridolin (Fred) Fischer Home.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Butler Church Bell.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:07, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Edna Theatre (Edna, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Val Verde Battery; C.S.A..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The story is interesting, but the oversaturated sky ruins the image. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:45, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Subdued sky -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support It's less worse. All this will not happen if you leave the original skies. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Kay Theater.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Bassett and Bassett Banking House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Old Federal Building (Victoria, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope — Rhododendrites ^talk |  01:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Fleming-Welder House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Southern exposure of Old Victoria County Courthouse.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope and quite a beautiful building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Elissa (ship, 1877) -- astern.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. Beautiful, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 08:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Phillips-Sale House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment It's the only on in the scope, so probably promote, but note there are some very strange artifacts in the trees (and a little bit near the top of the house). Could you reprocess this? — Rhododendrites ^talk |  20:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Done Maybe you will like this one better -- Jim Evans (talk) 22:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks. It is better, but something odd is still going on. I've added an image note to highlight the area where it's most noticeable. I don't know that it's a deal-breaker, but it seems like it would be fixable if you shoot in RAW? — Rhododendrites ^talk |  23:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment It would be preferable above all not to insist on trying to modify the sky. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I'd call this useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:31, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Saint Mary's Catholic Church (Victoria, Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Polk County Courthouse (Texas).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used. --GRDN711 (talk) 03:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I hope to see you again soon! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:24, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support You're always welcome here Jim. Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 21:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Boddeker House - Galveston.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. -- Ikan Kekek 00:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Herbertia lahue (Prairie nymph) - blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment, Best in scope. But camera location is missing.--Rocky Masum (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment That will be true of many of my flower pictures. I did not keep records of the locations, and do not use the coordinates feature because it uses battery. Some I remember where I took them others I don't. This is a wildflower and the picture was taken in a field in a park, but I don't remember which park. -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment It is useful for the flowers to know the location if they are endemic wild forms. If so, the county name may suffice. On the other hand, what is imperative is that you only show the flower: you must reduce the scope to "Flower". If you want your botanical images to be useful and used, take care of your caption! Inspiration from what has already been done. (Good shoot) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)Texte en italique
•  Comment I have added the county to the file description, is that what you meant? I don't understand what you mean by "what has already been done." If you mean other flowers proposed, I have seen so few, and don't remember how they were formatted. I have added blossom to the scope wording. -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment you have degraded your scope which is incompressible, reread what is written. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support OK now, just look at the formalization of the scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Thank you -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Cephalanthus occidentalis (flowers) (Buttonbush or Button Willow - inflorescence).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment This, like most of my flower pictures, has a large collection of similar images in the category. I'm having trouble finding my own pictures in the clutter. If this makes them impractical to assess I can quit proposing them, but someone must tell me. -- Jim Evans (talk) 03:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment The problem you have to solve is the scope problem. It must be precise and complete. Here you do not show a flower but an inflorescence and buttons. There is little competitive image for this scope. Also think about the advice I gave you above. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I don't follow you. The Category referenced has 60+ competitive images. I believe the word flower was added to the category to distinguish it from another plant with the name button such as button weed. -- Jim Evans (talk) 13:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support OK now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Cecil and Frances Brown House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Best in scope and a nice composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I feel your pain, brother. Three trips to one church recently, sun always to the rear. Finally got it. Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:34, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Endeavour Condominiums -- Houston Clear Lake.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 In renominations, it's a good practice to say that you've improved it based on discussion related to the previous nomination, but I see that and I think the building is sharp enough now. -- Ikan Kekek 01:40, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hippeastrum correiense (Amaryllis) - Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support. Useful and used, beautiful image -- Spurzem (talk) 23:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hibiscus coccineus (Texas Star or scarlet rose mallow) -- Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Hibiscus coccineus var. alba (White Texas Star or White Rose Mallow) -- Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Hibiscus coccineus var. 'Alba' is an official subspecies it is this name that you must put in the scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done Thank you
•  Support Useful and seems to be the only photo of this variant on Commons. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support et la photo est belle! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

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

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:41, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Tagetes patula 'Sparkler' (French Marigold) - blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment This is really a Tagetes patula, but for some reason a Tagetes patula category is forbidden on Commons so everyone uses Tagetes erecta?? -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 Comment You can't misidentify it, and you can create a new category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:57, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Changed. We'll see how this goes -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:50, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 Question And where are the other photos in scope? At the previous link? Please post it here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 Comment My original Cagegory/Scope is where everyone else puts Tagetes patula, mixed with Tagetes erecta.(Category:Close-ups of Tagetes erecta flowers) -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Oppose It is not the reference species but a cultivar. Each cutitvar has a different appearance. You have to find the name; there are some leads on the article in English, but the Web is full of horticultural catalogs ... The name of the category and the scope pretend to confusion: It is a close-up of the plant which shows the flower, it is not a close-up of the flower which will only show part ...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I think you understand "closeup" differently from me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:35, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

the close-up gives rise to confusion depending on the language, but this is only a remark; the root of the problem is toxinomy. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment @Archaeodontosaurus: I have changed the scope -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:41, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
• The scope has become acceptable but you have to attach it to a non-empty category. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Done @Archaeodontosaurus: But, I think it's going to roll off before it's acted on. Jim Evans (talk) 02:09, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Question So it's unique in scope? Just let me know whether there are other photos I should compare this to in this scope. -- Ikan Kekek ( talk) 04:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment -Ikan Kekek- You can look here Category:Tagetes erecta (cultivars) and here Category:Close-ups of Tagetes erecta flowers but I didn't see any that looked like they were this Cultivar. -- Jim Evans (talk) 16:37, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Oppose over saturated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comments:
  

(1) For the record, no saturation was added to any of the images Mr. Sharp asserted were over saturated

(2) Now let's discuss VI criteria. When I began here the rules said images were not supposed to be of highest quality, certainly not to be judged using QI standards. Here are some excerpts from the VI criteria:

a) . . . most valuable does not necessarily imply the best technical quality.

b) Valued images are less about perfect technical quality and more about your ingenuity in finding good and valuable subjects which matter

c) Requirement Reasonable sharpness, lighting, composition, and angle of view

d) For photographs, the quality achievable using the built-in camera in a modern mobile phone should normally be good enough. The technical standard required should be achievable by any photographer who has taken care over the image

(3) VI is about finding the most representative image. Where is the better image?

•  Support Useful. It might be oversaturated, but it could still be useful. The saturation could be preset on your camera or something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Completely agree with Ikan Kekek. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Colours are misleading. Fails criteria 'must illustrate its subject well' and reasonable technical quality and standard. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Lycoris radiata (Red Spider Lily) - Inflorescence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support The phylogenetic controversy is too complex to discuss the name; The caption of this image is excellent the image is good it is just that it is labeled. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose oversaturated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support However the best one in this category. --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Question What is your objective measure of over saturation?

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hymenocallis liriosme (Texas spiderlily) - Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:47, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Red Lagerstroemia indica 'Red Rocket' (Crepe Myrtle) - Inflorescence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The name of the genus is not enough, it is necessary to find the full name. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Another try. -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment The name of the species is missing and you should have put the image in the correct category that I had to rename. But there is one problem: this image is much better 2020-09-11 11 22 01 Red Rocket Crape Myrtle flowers along Tranquility Court in the Franklin Farm section of Oak Hill, Fairfax County, Virginia.jpg. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Question I don't understand what we are after here. Your "much better" choice may be better for the plant, but my scope is only for the inflorescence and my example best illustrates the inflorescence as all Crepe Myrtles appear in my locale. -- Jim Evans (talk) 16:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I may be looking at things the wrong way, but the individual flowers seem clearer at the size on the file page of the photo Archaeo linked. But are you saying there is a different variety of crepe myrtle in your locale? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I am saying I believe the conical-to-pyramidal shape of the flowers in this picture are the classic shape of a Crape Myrtle inflorescence. This one just being more perfect than most. [[13]], [[14]], [[15]], [[16]], [[17]] -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Question I understand your point. Archaeodontosaurus, what do you think about the shapes of inflorescences? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Multiple clipping anomalies, Poor color and contrast management (see note on picture) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Question OK, but what about the shape of the inflorescence? Is the other one a meaningfully different variation of shape, if you get my question? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

There are more or less dense inflorescences, the general shape of which depends on the individual in his mode of growth. Here it is very dense to the point that you cannot see the flowers well. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

 Support I agreed and made a similar remark above, but I think the latest version is best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Oppose oversaturated and processing errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Redid the image -- Jim Evans (talk) 20:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Question @Archaeodontosaurus: Did this fix it satisfactorily? -- Jim Evans (talk) 10:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Is fine. But what a shame not to have done it before. Take care of your work a little and everything will be simple. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:12, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Trachelospermum jasminoides (Confederate Jasmine) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Neutral Hi Jim! I'm not a big fan of the halo effect around the flower. Probably a leftover from cutting the flower, to blur the background? -- Tupungato (talk) 15:12, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
• Fixed Thanks @Tupungato: -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:56, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Good Caption --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Narcissus 'Tahiti' (Daffodil) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Cynara cardunculus var. altilis (Cardoon or Globe Artichoke) Bud.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Both of the pictures in the linked category look useful. Is there a way you could use different scopes for them? Also, I trust you were unable to find any other photos in scope that we should compare these to? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:59, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment bud and blossom? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Added "Bud" to the scope. This is no guarantee there are none but the only other Cardoon bud I found didn't appear to be the same type. -Jim Evans (talk) 12:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Mimosa strigillosa ('Powderpuff' Mimosa) Habitus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope. I think one flower is just a flower and a bunch of flowers is an inflorescence, but let's see what User:Archaeodontosaurus says. Definitely best in scope to me, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:22, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment This is a special case; we see the inflorescence but also the leaves in the usual habita. if you want to gad the scope, you can crop the infloresence or just put `` habitus in place of the infloresence in the scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Done @Ikan Kekek: I think you must review again because I changed the scope -- Jim Evans (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Sure thing. I confirm my supporting vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Tulipa 'Gavota' (Tulip) Blossoms.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:15, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Leucophyllum frutescens (Texas sage or Cenizo or purple sage or Texas ranger) Inflorescence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Spathiphyllum cochlearispathum (Peace Lilly) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support. Very good image, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Lilium 'Tiny Double You' (Lily) Blossom with Bud.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:16, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Pentas lanceolata 'Butterfly-Deep-Rose' (Pentas) Blossoms.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Pentas lanceolata 'Butterfly Deep Pink' (Pentas) Blossoms.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Gerbera 'Sweet Glow' (Gerbera Daisy) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Curio talinoides (Blue Chalksticks) Leaves.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:49, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Crinum 'Ellen Bosanquet' Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 17:06, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hemerocallis fulva 'Flore Pleno' (Double Daylily) Blossoms.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support. Beautiful, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 13:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hemerocallis 'Ruby Spider' (Daylily) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Beautiful flowers, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 17:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Mathilda Wehmeyer House and German-American Kindergarten School.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:51, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Ixora coccinea 'Maui Sunset' (Jungle Flame) Inflorescence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:48, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hemerocallis 'Pink Playmate' (daylily) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Scabiosa triandra (Pincushion flower) Inflorescences.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Lilium 'Pink Heaven' (Oriental lily) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Question This is about to roll off. Why no comments?

•  Comment The photograph is taken too closely and the flower is distorted, it is difficult to recognize a lily. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
•  Question And, the better picture on Commons is . . .?
• There are not any. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
•  Support for a 1Mb image, I find it adequate to depict the subject. I would say "until another one comes along", but the fact that we have only one suggests it's not a popular subject with our contributors. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Lilium longiflorum x Oriental 'Triumphator' (Triumphator Lily) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Epiphyllum x 'Unforgettable' (Orchid cactus) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Beautiful, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 12:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hippeastrum 'Kolibri' (Amaryllis) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hidalgo Park Quiosco.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Forgotten signature

Hi Jim, thanks for your vote !! You forgot to sign on the VI review : Commons:Valued image candidates/Building at 12 rue d'Engueysse in Albi 01.jpg. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Beaconsfield Apartment Building.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 23:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Cactus flower -- Epiphyllum hookeri.jpg

This image has been closed in the rules; it is not possible to change the content. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Jacobaea maritima 'Silverdust' (Dusty miller) Foliage.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The image is beautiful, but the scope must be reduced to what is to be shown. It is not the habit, it is the foliage. Add foliage or leaves and it will be perfect. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:45, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Sorry. While looking for the correct term to refer to the foliage I got distracted. -- Jim Evans (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:56, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Pittosporum tobira (flowers) (Japanese Cheesewood) Inflorescence.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope You leave artifacts on your images that are easy to correct. The layer is too hard it must be softened it is very easy to work on this point. But the quality is sufficient for it to be promoted. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Melrose Building -- Houston.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Koelreuteria bipinnata (Chinese golden rain tree) Fruit or seed pods.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rice University Mechanical Laboratory and Power House.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. --Ermell 18:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Rice University Mechanical Laboratory and Power House.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Melrose Building -- Houston.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Perfect now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

★ 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:
Epiphyllum hookeri (Cactus flower) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Previous reviews

 Comment If it is most valuable it should be placed in info box. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:02, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

 Comment If it is judged best I will do that. -- Jim Evans (talk) 16:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Looks good to my untrained eye. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
• No problem for the image but the new submission does not follow the rules. This chapter must be reread. The old appointment must be visible and pay attention to the dates. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Being the first time I'd done this I had cut away the prior comments before realizing they were needed and didn't think of going into history to recover them until now. I think the date was done correctly. -- Jim Evans (talk) 18:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cardoon Bud -- Cynara cardunculus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me--Lmbuga 17:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Hippeastrum 'Pink Diamond' (Amaryllis) Blossom.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ 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:
Cleome 'Senorita Rosalita' (Spider flower) blossom with buds.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Beautiful, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 20:11, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:57, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amaryllis -- Hippeastrum ‘Pink-Diamond’.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. --Nefronus 15:33, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:The Palace Theatre -- Albany New York.jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:The Palace Theatre -- Albany New York.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

Elisfkc (talk) 01:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/Maud Moller House 2

Commons:Valued image candidates/Maud Moller House 2 is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: CSD G1 (test page, accidental creation, or page containing nonsense or no valid content): Superseded by Commons:Valued image candidates/Maud Moller House 2.jpg If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

A1Cafel (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

File:Giant Beatles -- David Adickes Studio.jpg

File:Giant Beatles -- David Adickes Studio.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 07:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

We need your feedback!

Hello. Apologies if this message is not in your native language: please feel free to respond in the language of your choice. Thank you!

I am writing to you because we are looking for feedback for a new Wikimedia Foundation project, Structured Data Across Wikimedia (SDAW). SDAW is a grant-funded programme that will explore ways to structure content on wikitext pages in a way that will be machine-recognizable and -relatable, in order to make reading, editing, and searching easier and more accessible across projects and on the Internet. We are now focusing on designing and building image suggestion features for experienced users.

We have some questions to ask you about your experience with uploading images here on Wikimedia Commons and then adding them to Wikipedia. You can answer these questions on a specific feedback page on Mediawiki, where we will gather feedback. As I said, these questions are in English, but your answers do not need to be in English! You can also answer in your own language, if you feel more comfortable.

Once the collecting of feedback will be over, we will sum it up and share with you a summary, along with updated mocks that will incorporate your inputs.

Also, if you want to keep in touch with us or you want to know more about the project, you can subscribe to our newsletter.

Hope to hear from you soon! -- Sannita (WMF) (talk to me!) 09:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Вікі любить пам'ятки 2021 в Україні / Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 in Ukraine

Привіт!

З 1 по 30 вересня вже традиційно пройде українська частина міжнародного фотоконкурсу «Вікі любить пам'ятки»! В Україні цей конкурс пройде вже вдесяте. На конкурс можна подавати власні фото пам'яток історико-культурної спадщини України — і змагатися за призи. Більше можна прочитати за посиланням.

Радимо ознайомитися із детальними правилами, а також із відповідями на часті питання. Як і того року — у номінації «За найбільшу кількість сфотографованих пам’яток» можна отримати 21 бал за фотографії об'єктів, якщо світлин цієї пам'ятки раніше не було завантажено.

Нагадаємо, що всі фотографії автоматично беруть участь у номінації «За найбільшу кількість сфотографованих пам’яток»; однак для того, щоб фото позмагалося у номінації «Найкраще фото», потрібно підтвердити це при завантаженні.

Цього року вперше будуть окремо виділені фото з повітря (дронами, квадрокоптерами тощо) — у спеціальній номінації «Аерофото». Для того, щоб робота потрапила на спецномінацію потрібно вибрати її у Завантажувачі.

Також вперше проводиться спеціальна номінація «Пам'ятки Подесення», знову пройдуть спецномінації «Відео», «Єврейська спадщина», «Млини», «Пам'ятки національно-визвольної боротьби» та «Via Regia Ukraine». Для участі світлин у цих спецномінаціях не потрібно обирати нічого у Завантажувачі — світлини зараховуватимуться автоматично з відповідних списків.

Усі номінації та спецномінації конкурсу описані тут.

Приєднуйтеся!

Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут. Більше інформації про конкурс дивіться за посиланням. Щоб отримувати інформацію про новинки у конкурсі — підпишіться на наші блог та сторінку у фейсбук.

Важливо! Цього року відбулася адміністративно-територіальна реформа. Однак, ми проводимо конкурс ще за попереднім адміністративно-територіальним устроєм. Ми почали роботу над створенням списків з новим поділом, але вона ще не є завершена. Ви можете користуватися тими новими списками, що вже є, якщо потрібно відшукати пам'ятку за новим поділом (деякі ОДА вже почали присилати у такому форматі), але пам'ятайте, що нові списки ще не є повними.

Якщо у Вас є запитання, можете звертатися wlmwikimedia.org.ua чи у фейсбук – З повагою, Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки».17:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Ви отримали це повідомлення, оскільки Ви брали участь в одному із фотоконкурсів «Вікімедіа Україна» чи допомагали (наприклад, редагували файли з цих конкурсів).

If you do not speak Ukrainian, but you are interested in a contest, you can check out our page in English here.

Вікі любить пам'ятки 2021 в Україні триває до 30 вересня / Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 in Ukraine is on till September 30

Автор фото Aeou, інфографіка AnastasiaPetrova (WMUA), CC BY-SA 4.0

Переможці спеціальної номінації «Відео» 2020. Автори роликів: Ігор Мартинів, Кирило Венцеславський; Музика: Erik Satie: Gymnopedie No 2 by Kevin MacLeod. Монтаж: Atoly. Ліцензія CC BY-SA 4.0

Привіт!

Нагадуємо, що до 30 вересня включно можна вантажити світлини та відео культурної спадщини України до національного етапу міжнародного фотоконкурсу «Вікі любить пам'ятки»!

Зараз Україна посідає 3-є місце за кількістю завантажених світлин, поступаючись Російській Федерації та Німеччині. За першу половину місяця було завантажено світлини пам'яток із усіх регіонів України, але частина із них є дуже погано представлена. Севастополь зараз представлений тільки однією пам'яткою і одним фото, Крим — 12 пам'яток і 51 фото. Детальніше — у таблиці:

Проміжна статистика

Регіон	К-ть пам'яток	К-ть фото
Севастополь	1	1
АР Крим	12	51
Закарпаття	26	96
Миколаївщина	29	81
Рівненщина	36	186
Херсонщина	36	83
Житомирщина	55	324
Донеччина	57	153
Тернопільщина	62	234
Буковина	75	220
Луганщина	82	90
Львівщина	82	351
Кіровоградщина	88	181
Волинь	98	270
Одещина	115	383
Сумщина	129	414
Дніпропетровщина	139	278
Київ	159	248
Хмельниччина	166	538
Полтавщина	171	594
Харківщина	175	625
Київщина	181	651
Черкащина	186	455
Прикарпаття	240	305
Вінничина	242	775
Запоріжжя	253	317
Чернігівщина	305	519

Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут. Усі номінації та спецномінації конкурсу описані тут.

Цього року у конкурсі є вісім спеціальних номінацій:

• «Аерофото» — для фото з повітря (зроблені дронами, квадрокоптерами тощо). Для того, щоб робота потрапила на спецномінацію потрібно вибрати її у Завантажувачі;
• «Відео» — для відеосюжетів з пам'ятками;
• «Єврейська спадщина» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
• «Млини» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
• «Пам'ятки національно-визвольної боротьби» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
• «Пам'ятки Подесення» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
• «Via Regia Ukraine» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом 15 населених пунктів, що за цим маршрутом є.

Більше інформації про конкурс дивіться за посиланням. Щоб отримувати інформацію про новинки у конкурсі — підпишіться на наші блог та сторінку у фейсбук.

Приєднуйтеся!

Якщо у Вас є запитання, можете звертатися wlmwikimedia.org.ua чи у фейсбук – З повагою, Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки». 19:09, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Ви отримали це повідомлення, оскільки Ви брали участь в одному із фотоконкурсів «Вікімедіа Україна» чи допомагали (наприклад, редагували файли з цих конкурсів).

If you do not speak Ukrainian, but you are interested in a contest, you can check out our page in English here.

File:Life size logo at Blue Bell Creameries.jpg

File:Life size logo at Blue Bell Creameries.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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 11:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

File:1900 Storm Memorial 2.jpg

File:1900 Storm Memorial 2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Headlock0225 (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Isabella_Offenbach_Maas_Residence

Isabella Offenbach Maas Residence 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!

Jadine (talk) 12:27, 15 August 2022 (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:Statue of Sam Houston -- Huntsville, Texas.jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)