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.
I think we should tweak the scope, since Shakespeare's isn't the only work of that name, and a little specificity would save a lot of headaches later. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:29, 23 May 2010 (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: Brassica oleracea italica (Broccoli). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Comment There is more than one Troilus and Cressida. Perhaps we should specify "William Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida"? Though it doesn't matter much now - we have nothing of any real quality in the other subscopes - I think it'd be less open to attack through a high-quality Chaucer image. Plus, it adds a search term. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support with the note that I am not entirely a neutral party, so you may want to treat my vote with less weight that other people's. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agreed with the more precise scope. For such a scope, it would be nice to have an image of the play on stage but it seems that there's none in Commons. For the same reasons as in this other review, I prefer this engraving to the title page of this 1609 quarto edition. @Adam Cuerden: VI rules say: "neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it)" so your support is plainly valid and will be counted as a full vote. --Myrabella (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's a conflict of interest, and needs declared. I also encouraged Fox to try the restoration, and gave him a bit of advice, though he did do all the work, up to my recent minorish edit, which I discussed with him a bit ago, just before this was nominated here, by coincidence (it ran on the En-wiki main page recently). Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:46, 25 May 2010 (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: Aurora. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
Opposeas not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (is not geocoded). Lycaon (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's very easy: If you know the location, the tool [1] will give you the complete location dec template for Commons. You can edit the place (Strg+click) and the direction (Shift+click).Lipedia (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's just that we don't know the location. The center of the runway of that airfield isn't the exact solution, but we probably can't find the precise location. So what to do? --Ikar.us (talk) 17:45, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Exact is not always necessary but adding geocoding to an image you didn't take yourself should be done judicially. Lycaon (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note that using the tool, the resolution limit is something like a 30mx30m square, maybe even more than that. If you can get it to within that sort of range, you're fine. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Precision requirements shouldn't be defined by a poor tool. Some images deserve a dm resolution. But in this case, we won't get better than a few km. --Ikar.us (talk) 01:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some images may deserve it, but I doubt it'd really be possible to get much better than 100 ft using anything short of a military-grade GPS at the time of photography. Also, it says it's over Bear Lake. There's a cabin rental area near Bear Lake which is part of the base. After an hour's work trying to find the best match, I think I have a possibility. Evidence on the Image description page. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The quality of the satellite images is sufficient to see single trees. I think I've found them. Thank you for finding bear lake! --Ikar.us (talk) 02:59, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The jury is still out on this one but I'm willing to give up on my opposition and settle with a less accurate location if the description is ammended (different Bear Lake -> criterion 4). It is probably the best illustration of the scope we have anyhow. See also this discussion. Lycaon (talk) 08:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, IMO, best of borealis, and australis too. Question Does the word "aurora" design in English this phenomena only ? In French not. "Aurore" designs the short time before the sunrise, between night and day. Maybe the latin (scientific) words Aurora polaris could be more international as scope, and more useful ?--Jebulon (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems you're right. English-German dictionaries translate it at both Polarlicht and Morgenröte. Temporary Oppose because of ambigous scope. --Ikar.us (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In English, "aurora" refers to this phenomenon only, see en:Aurora (astronomy) or [2]. "Twilight" is used for the period just before sunrise and just after sunset when it's still light. I haven't a clue what Morgenröte means. :S Also, if we do decide to go with a genericsed Latin term, it would need to be the plural. Aurorae, Wiktionary tells me, so I guessed right! Latin is hard. :( --Matthew Proctor (talk) 09:40, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you native speaker? Then I restore Support and am going to report to the dictionary. Morgenröte (morning redness) is the red light above the horizon before sunrise, during twilight time. --Ikar.us (talk) 18:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, native speaker. "Sunrise" is used for the period where the sky is red before the sun, you know, rises, in English as well. Not the most consistent of languages. --Matthew Proctor (talk) 03:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, please have a look at this disambiguation page then. Some of your fellow native speakers list over a hundred (!!) possible meanings for the word aurora. Granted, some are obscure, but some are very competitive (e.g. the mythology one). So I guess refining the scope is not optional but mandatory. Lycaon (talk) 05:34, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am a native speaker of English. Aurora, if not disambiguated, almost without exception, refers to the atmospheric phenomenon.[3] In biology, it sometimes appears in binomial names, e.g., Rana aurora, but that usage is disambiguated by context. Rarely, it may appear in literature or poetry to refer to the dawn or the goddess. This was more common before the twentieth century, and would not be understood by many twenty-first century readers. Please note that aurora may apply to planets besides Earth, e.g., Jupiter.[4]Walter Siegmund(talk)19:37, 26 May 2010 (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: Folly (architecture). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
Comment About the scope wording: it should be in the singular. About possible competitors : I intend to set up a MVR, with some famous 18th-century French follies, e.g. this one (my own contribution:-)—note that the landscape is artificial too) and that one (this Temple of Modern Philosophy was unfinished on purpose—I will complete the description and add a geotag), plus a contemporary folly, as this concept is still used in architecture nowodays (perhaps this one). --Myrabella (talk) 09:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Having learned that this is a folly, I find it the most impressive example and the most impressive picture. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:22, 31 May 2010 (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: Mycena interrupta (Pixies' parasol). 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: Thiodina puerpera, female. 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: Phacochoerus africanus (Warthog). 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: Chelsea Clinton. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Comment Best in scope indeed but I wonder in which topic gallery it going to be placed. I suppose that some Public Person's Relatives gallery should be created :))) --MrPanyGoff08:38, 6 March 2011 (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: Skylark (Alauda arvensis). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Support I agree with the nominator. At f/8, the depth of field is such that the subject stands out from the blurred background. A species of meadows, it is well-depicted in its natural milieu. --Walter Siegmund(talk)16:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First steps tutorial
Getting help
Goodies, tips, and tricks
Made a mistake?
