User talk:Kestreltail

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Kestreltail!

First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks

Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
There are several tools to upload files.
Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.

Made a mistake?

Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 16:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A picture I nominated to upload here[edit]

IMG_7878 Kestreltail (talk) 00:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Kestreltail,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 00:59, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Kestreltail,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please enable e-mail to be eligible to win a prize in Wiki Loves Monuments![edit]

Thank you for uploading images for Wiki Loves Monuments!

However, we have noticed you have not enabled e-mail. To be eligible to win a prize the contest, you need to enable e-mail. This is what to do:

Check the top right of your screen, and log in if you have not done so already
Go to your preferences
Scroll down to Email Options
Enter your email address and click "Allow other users to email me"
Click Save

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Kestreltail,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Thank you! --Baycrest (Talk) 12:45, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-au[edit]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-au has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Calvinkulit • t • c 07:46, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-4.0-layout[edit]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-4.0-layout has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Calvinkulit • t • c 23:25, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-layout[edit]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-layout has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-us[edit]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-us has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-au[edit]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-3.0-au has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-layout[edit]

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-layout has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warning for repeated vandalism[edit]

{{autotranslate|base=test3|1=Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-layout|2=}}--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How did I vandalize? Please be specific. I get the feeling that you're browbeating me here. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:19, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kestreltail: I'm sorry that I can't find a proper warn template, maybe Commons should have other Uw- templates created? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: I see. In the meantime, why don't you just type out a message for me? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:57, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: Please refrain from using incorrect warning templates. If you want to warn someone because they did something wrong, then either create a template yourself or write the message. Masum Reza^📞 22:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Drawing off of your info template[edit]

Hi Kestreltail, just feel free to use it. I've modified some of the Chinese text for you, hope you will like it! --Baycrest (Talk) 17:24, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks! I appreciate it. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:30, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019! Please help with this survey.[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Kestreltail,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team MediaWiki message delivery 12:34, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

Are you done with the templates I temporarily undeleted? ~riley (talk) 05:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am finished. You can re-delete them now. Thanks! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 14:40, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 Participant Survey (Reminder)[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Kestreltail,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2019, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 210K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 40 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2019.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team MediaWiki message delivery 03:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Things I find in QIC[edit]

Used in SSC The Best Chinese Skylines thread on that day 11 February

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kestreltail (talk • contribs) 21:37, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kestreltail (talk • contribs) 00:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Plaza 66.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Summit Avenue station (MBTA Green Line "C" Branch).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

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

review

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

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Shard.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

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

review

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

review

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 House Condominiums, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Grand Rapids.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Skyline of Niagara Falls, Ontario - View from Upstream (Southeast).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

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

review

Best in Scope Wow, nice image! Consider featured picture nomination. Buidhe (talk) 02:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a cool photo, but the folks over at FPC have very high standards and I doubt it would succeed. I'm no expert photographer, but the fact that the photo was taken from over a mile away from the building tells me that the very picky reviewers over there would find a way to complain about the quality. If you are more experienced than I am, then I would encourage you to nominate this image, as the subject is certainly interesting enough for FP. I'll also ping @Ikan Kekek: for his expert opinion. Also, I'm going to change the scope from "Strata, London" to "Strata, London - Frontal View, since it appears the back of the building looks quite different. Pinging @Buidhe: . —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No objections to change in scope. I have no experience with FPC but this image just seemed to be of high technical proficiency in my (amateur) opinion. Buidhe (talk) 02:26, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do have experience with FPC. I've been lurking over there for several months now, voting occasionally, and it's a frightening place for the amateur photographer. Trust me, I've tried nominating an image there. They will savagely beat down any nomination that isn't of the finest technical quality, and even if the quality is fine, they can shoot down a nomination because they don't like how it looks. I mean, if they can heartlessly kill a nomination like this one so easily, they would probably eat this one for breakfast. (Note: This was mostly humorous writing meant to emphasize how intimidating FPC can be, and is in no way a criticism of the very fine people over at FPC. ) —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:41, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This is a very good composition, and I might vote for it at FPC, but I'm a little doubtful enough people would consider the subject sharp enough. I'd suggest posting to COM:Photography critiques and asking there whether people thought this could be an FP or not. I don't think people at FPC are necessarily heartless, though I guess that can happen; it's more like, we're opinionated and most of us take seriously the notice that "this is one of the finest pictures" on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Most of us take seriously the notice that "this is one of the finest pictures" on the site." My point exactly. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

File:Gobierno de Azerbaiyán, Baku, Azerbaiyán, 2016-09-26, DD 27.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:
Government House of Azerbaijan.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued image candidates/SARS-CoV-2 without background.png scope change[edit]

Please reconfirm your vote on Commons:Valued image candidates/SARS-CoV-2 without background.png after scope change. Piotr Bart (talk) 14:16, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Green Building, Columbus, Ohio.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Platform 1 of Langfang Railway Station.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Central Plaza 1, Brisbane.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Hongqi L5, front and right side.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 K. Polk State Office Building, Nashville.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

FPC question[edit]

"Wow! I'm interested to know what is in those cans... :-) —Percival Kestreltail (Discussão) 18:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)"

Sardines_as_food#Portugal, in Brazil sardines took an important paper due to Portuguese influence.

-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 00:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problem in VI[edit]

You close and label the images very well, I congratulate you, it lightens my work. Remove them from the list when you do. Thank you for your help! Bon souvenir de France...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Archaeodontosaurus: I'm glad to help! I was so happy I finally figured out how to label the files as VI, that I forgot I also had to remove them from the list. I'll remember to do that from now on. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Archaeodontosaurus: I noticed that you seem to be manually adding a timestamp to the VI template. You can add five tildes to automatically generate a timestamp. Like this:

~~~~~

—Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:16, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I do not know this date must correspond to the closing of the nomination or to the labeling itself; these two dates may be different. As your solution is easy and saves time, I will adopt it!--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for VicNotBot, but I think to regularise the situation you need to apply for permission at Commons:Bots/Requests. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 07:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do I though, because it's not a bot! I just didn't want all of those menial edits under my own username, so I created my not-bot. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 12:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow you know how to program too: you will save us! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, unfortunately I don't know how to program, I only created my "not bot" so that those edits of mine will not be under my main username. I usually don't like to clog up my contributions with menial edits, so I thought it would be a fun idea to have a "not-bot" that acts just like the regular bot! :-) —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks for doing it, but the problem now is the username; those ending in "bot" are only allowed for actual bots to avoid confusion. However, looking here, we might soon have someone to sort this out. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like they need to get ahold of Dschwen before they can start work though. And yea, I didn't notice that you can't name a user "bot". —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:11, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

VICnotbot (talk) 23:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promotion[edit]

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

review

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2020 – Last day to enter![edit]

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2020}} to your userpage!

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Hi there! Kevin from Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States here. I know it's been a tough year for everyone, and I hope this message finds you well.

You are receiving this message as a participant in last year's Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 in the United States. First, a recap: We concluded with over 5,200 great photos of U.S. historical sites made possible by contributors like you. If you haven't yet seen, last year's U.S. winners are viewable here, and the international winners here (including multiple from the United States!).

Second, as you may have seen from the banner notices on Wikipedia, this year's Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in the United States has been running through October instead of September in consideration of the pandemic and the hectic start of the fall season. Despite the challenges of the year, we're thrilled that the United States has surpassed 5,000 photo contributions so far.

October 31st is the last day to upload photos for the U.S. competition this year. If you've already contributed, thank you so much - and it's great to have you again this year! If you haven't yet contributed but are interested in participating again, you're invited to join us during these last couple days. Check out the United States event page for more information. Remember that you are welcome to upload and submit photos of historic sites that you've taken any time in the past, not just this month.

As always, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020! Please help with this survey[edit]

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Kestreltail,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2020, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again for a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 200K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey.

Please fill in this short survey, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2020.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team, 08:27, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Edited your picture[edit]

Good morning Percival

I saw this image of yours Media:View of Chicago Skyline from The Magic Hedge at Montrose Point Bird Sanctuary.jpg and thought it could make a nice picture. But it did not turn out as nice for me as I thought. If you want you can revert it by clicking on Revert beside the original. I will not be disturbed as it did not turn out as well as I hoped --Jim Evans (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Evans: Thanks for trying to edit it! Also, that is not actually my picture, I uploaded it from Flickr. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

Sorry[edit]

Hello Percival

I'm sorry you got drawn into the discord between Archaeodontosaurus and me. You were an innocent bystander that found yourself in the middle of a fundamental disagreement over photos of skyscrapers in dense metropolitan areas.

By the way, you have some nice pictures of skyscrapers.

jim -- Jim Evans (talk) 00:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Evans: That's okay! I'm glad you were able to edit that picture to our satisfaction. As an architecture enthusiast myself I understand the difficulties of photographing tall buildings in dense areas. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I have greatly enjoyed your recent submissions to VIC... I used to be the only person nominating pictures of buildings! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ping didn't work[edit]

I left you a message on First Evangelical Lutheran Church __ Jim Evans (talk) 03:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Evans: Thanks for letting me know. The reason your ping didn't work is because my actual wiki username is just "Kestreltail" —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When I save to a JPEG, for upload to Commons, my workflow results in dashes being substituted where spaces exist. When I began uploading pictures I didn't understand why the dashes mattered. I soon figured that out but by then habits had formed and I would forget sometimes and leave the dashes in. The picture you were asking about was an earlier upload. Once uploaded, Commons makes renaming or deleting a picture so difficult I leave screwed up names even if I discover a typo, odd phrasing ("shot for bill"), etc. I rarely make the mistake anymore so when I use the filename to make the category I may not notice it's one with dashes and fail to take them out. That's what happened here. -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for explaining! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

File:Haeundae LCT The Sharp.jpg[edit]

File:Haeundae LCT The Sharp.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:WBC The Palace Busan South Korea.jpg[edit]

File:WBC The Palace Busan South Korea.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:SkyscraperCity.svg[edit]

File:SkyscraperCity.svg 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.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 01:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do object[edit]

I'm not angry, but I do object to you changing my picture during the review process without consulting me. You cropped off the corner of the roof. But, just leave it be now, I'll take car of it after it rolls off review.

I edited your picture File:Concord-Carlisle High School.jpeg. But, I waited until the review process was complete before uploading my edit. -- Jim Evans (talk) 20:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your crop did demonstrate one interesting thing, Archaeodontosaurusis is willing to sacrifice part of the primary subject to remove an inconsequential peripheral. -- --Jim Evans (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Evans: Sorry, but I don't see the place where I cropped the roof off... could you make a note? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 21:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, the page wasn't loading my new version. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 21:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good, because I have never learned how to make notes on pictures. For what it's worth on the Col. Hugh B. and Helen Moore House image he is now unhappy about, I'm pretty good at editing pictures, but that's an edit I'm unable to do. And, he didn't explain what perspective distortion he's talking about. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I retract what I said about Archaeodontosaurusis and the Col. Hugh B. and Helen Moore House image. I saw Oppose followed by his name and thought it was his post. I see now I was mistaken. -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:14, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I want you to know I appreciate your support. We don't always agree but you seem even handed. So thanks.

You asked about a second E.S. Levy building. I could not reply because it had been closed to comments. The answer is, I got the wrong address somewhere, probably on Wikipedia. Shot the building and later discovered the error. It is so difficult to get pictures deleted on Commons, and it wasn't being used so I just left it. After your question I managed to get it deleted. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I don't always agree with everyone but I do try to be even-handed! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Jacobs Home is fixed File:Jacobs Home earlier called Miller-Jacobs Home, Galveston.jpg -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:14, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to hear it. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:31, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MVR[edit]

I'd never done an MVR before so I'm not sure how it works. You commented on McKinney-McDonald House but didn't vote. I assume you have to vote on for either the old or new image?? If so, is one vote all that's necessary to replace a new image with the older?

I'm also sending you an email -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've never done an MVR either, since I never figured out how it works. IMO they should replace it with something more efficient, because I have no idea how voting works on two noms side by side. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The process, though clumsy, is well explained. I found the instructions clear and easy to follow. If you have questions I may be able to help. -- Jim Evans (talk) 03:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, perhaps I was just lazy and didn't read it properly! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File mover[edit]

I've approved your request for the filemover right. Make sure to pay attention to the renaming guidelines; in particular, when it is appropriate not to leave a redirect. (For your own uploads, when correcting a file name immediately after upload, you don't need to leave a redirect. In most other cases, you do.)

On a personal note, when uploading new files, would you consider adding the date in the filename? For subjects like railroad stations and cityscapes that may change over time, having the time period in the filename makes it easy to select the most current (or most relevant) file in categories. The style that I've used for my uploads (including a large number of Boston-related images) is to list the month and year, as in File:Abandoned northbound tunnel from Boylston station, July 2019.JPG. I feel that sets a good compromise between clarity and conciseness. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, I will keep that in mind!

—Percival Kestreltail (talk) 23:59, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Quick question, I want to rename File:Maynard Town Hall in Maynard Massachusetts MA on Maine Street.jpg which has an obvious typo in the name, and the popup window asks if I want to "replace usage immediately". What does this mean, and should I do it in this case? Thanks. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That means that the system will automatically update the file name where it's used on other wikis. Usually that will be under your username, though files with a lot of usage will be handled by bots. I would recommend always leaving it checked; I don't think I've encountered any situation to uncheck it. Best, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MVR[edit]

Placing MVR candidates was well explained but closing them was poorly explained, confusing and ponderous. I'm not sure I've done it right and I think there were more steps I didn't do because I didn't understand them. The instructions for closures need a lot of work. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, it looks broken! I don't know how to fix it though... —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I need to explain. I successfully closed the three that have been open for a while (though maybe not correctly). The one that's the mess is a fourth, You may have noticed a text pair between a couple of the original three. I couldn't get it to work originally. I waited until the other three were done to try this one again.

Archaeodontosaurus does not try to fix problems with MVR closures, saying they're complicated and he doesn't know how. He did say, often the problem is the original approval was not closed properly. You've done closures. Would you mind checking the approved one to see if you find anything that can be corrected? -- Jim Evans (talk) 11:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I figured out what was wrong with the Maud Moller House nomination: you forgot to add the closing braces! Should be fixed now. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll try to set them up again. There are suppose to be two images side by side. -- Jim Evans (talk) 19:43, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They're both showing now. Thanks a lot for fixing this. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Sometimes you have to wait a bit before the updated version shows up on the candidate list. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

a note[edit]

You recently sent me a note. Pings show as red at the top of the page. These notes show as green. How is that done? -- Jim Evans (talk) 17:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are talking about. I only get red "alerts" and blue "notifications". Do you remember where I sent the note? And what happens if I mention you right now? Does that give the green note? Jim Evans —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 18:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They're probably blue, I have a bad memory for colors. So, they must be called notifications. How does one create a notification? Your mention above caused a red note. -- Jim Evans (talk) 01:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, the blue notifications are only for when someone sends thanks for an edit. I think I thanked you for editing out my shadow on one of my photos, which would have sent you a blue note. Jim Evans —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, how/where do you do that? -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:37, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the revision history for a page, it says "thank" after each edit. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 02:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you for your support over the last months -- Jim Evans (talk) 02:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're back![edit]

You were gone for a month -- Jim Evans (talk) 15:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Evans: You're right, I haven't participated at VIC for quite some time. But yesterday I came across an uploader with many potentially valuable images, so you might see some nominations from me again.

—Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's good to see you back. I don't know if you left before I remembered I had flower pictures I could upload. But, it's been a pain. Archaeodontosaurus is head of biology or something of the sort at a university. He dises a number of my flower pictures for one reason or another. For example, Blood Lilys are also called Fireball lilys because their classic form is spherical [[1]] (which my picture is) but he preferred a hemispherical shot he found so mine went down the tubes. I'm not sure why he did this. Maybe he has never seen a Blood Lily. But, his constantly jumping on my flowers appears to have made others reluctant to support them. Flower picture preferences are subjective anyway. -- Jim Evans (talk) 23:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I left after you started the flower nominations but I hesitate to vote on them myself since I know next to nothing of botany. I tend to vote on easy to judge scopes. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Talk to you later. -- Jim Evans (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Edmonton Ice District & Residences.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 23:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tower 49®, New York.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Melrose Building[edit]

Did you notice this building [3] is the this one [4] which caused the brouhaha a few months ago? I figured you'd ask why I didn't take it that way originally. -- Jim Evans (talk) 22:28, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did notice this is the same building. Also, only in this photo I recognized the glass building behind it (that you have erased) as the BG Group Place, the other was distorted so I didn't recognize it. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Demolition of 270 Park Avenue, New York (April 2021).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Skyline of Lower Manhattan, New York from Liberty Island, 2021.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Centrale, New York City.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
5pointz towers.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

nice to see u

Charlie fong (talk) 14:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2021[edit]

Hello! Last year you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in the United States. Thanks to people like you, it was a great success with over 1,000 people contributing almost 6,000 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage. If you haven't seen the winners yet, be sure to check them out here.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 in the United States through the month of October, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information.

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2020, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 21:19, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Amberly, New York City.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Hub on Causeway Residential Tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was 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 Hub on Causeway Office Tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

Question Clearly superior, but aren't we looking at the other side? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, it's a 3-sided building, but I don't think multiple scopes are needed for different angles since the building is relatively uniform. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 12:14, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The colors and shapes look very different to me in the two photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The color difference looks minimal to me and is probably because the first photo is backlit. As for the shape... we're merely looking at it from an adjacent side, so the spire is now on the opposite side of the building. Not much else looks out of place to me. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question The black thing on the right side? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That is a separate building, the Omniturm. Personally I thought it was obvious that it was a different building, but I'm familiar with the buildings in the area, and now that you mention it I can see how people might get confused. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 14:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Support as best in scope, but it would be good to improve the file description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scores: 
1. Frankfurt Am Main-Commerzbank Tower vom Rathenauplatz-20100808.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Commerzbank Tower Frankfurt.jpg: +1
=>
File:Frankfurt Am Main-Commerzbank Tower vom Rathenauplatz-20100808.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Commerzbank Tower Frankfurt.jpg: Promoted.

-- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dubai Sheikh Zayed Road.jpg[edit]

File:Dubai Sheikh Zayed Road.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:41, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dubai at night Sheikh Zayed Road.jpg[edit]

File:Dubai at night Sheikh Zayed Road.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 04:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dubai Marina towers.jpg[edit]

File:Dubai Marina towers.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 08:51, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dubai Sheikh Zayed Road 2016.jpg[edit]

File:Dubai Sheikh Zayed Road 2016.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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 08:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
111 West 57th Street, New York - north facade.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at 18 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

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

review

Support A clearer view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support overall better than the other option Lorax (talk) 01:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scores: 
1. One Vanderbilt April 2021.jpg: -1 (current VI)
2. One Vanderbilt April 2023.jpg: +2 <--
=>
File:One Vanderbilt April 2021.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former.
File:One Vanderbilt April 2023.jpg: Promoted. <--

--A1Cafel (talk) 11:26, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted[edit]

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Central Park Tower - view from 30 Rockefeller Plaza.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Best in Scope. Very good image, useful and often used -- Spurzem (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Best in scope to me. Much more details and there aren't CAs on this one. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:15, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment At low resolution, this image works best of the three because the entire building is more clearly and more evenly separated from the background.--Cartoffel (talk) 06:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC) Scores:[reply]

 1. Commons:Valued image candidates/Central Park Tower April 2021.jpg: +1 (current VI within same scope) <--
 2. Commons:Valued image candidates/Central Park Tower April 2023 1.jpg: -1
 3. Commons:Valued image candidates/Central Park Tower April 2023 2.jpg: -1

 =>
 File:Central Park Tower April 2021.jpg: remains as VI. <--
 File:Central Park Tower April 2023 1.jpg: declined
 File:Central Park Tower April 2023 2.jpg: declined

--Milseburg (talk) 08:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]