User talk:Pudelek/Archive1

Welcome to the Commons, Pudelek/Archive1!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. 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. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 21:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

aaaapsik

Frydek Mistek

Ech, burdel tu maja - jak chcesz to to przerzuc, ja na razie niestety nie mam czasu. Pzdr AvantaR 10:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Festung_Krakau_-_Wawel1.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Festung_Krakau_-_Wawel1.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand 23:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rotunda_sv._Longina.jpg

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 15:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Złatna_-_Kościół.JPG

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand 08:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

{{English}}, {{Polish}}... => {{en|English text}}, {{pl|Polish text}}...

Hi,
I just wanted to inform you that {{English}}, {{Polish}}... templates are nom deprecated : they should not be used any more.
Instead, you can use the following : {{en|your English text}}, {{pl|your Polish text}}, etc.
Best regards from France,
-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 08:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Comprachschutz.jpg

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 10:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Image:Spišská_Kapitula-Zipser_Kapitel_2.jpg

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 20:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Tytul grafiki

Niestety na chwile obecna MediaWiki nie obsluguje operacji tego typu. Nalezy zaladowac obrazek pod nowa nazwa, a do starego wpisac {{badname|prawidlowa nazwa.jpg}}. Herr Kriss 17:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Ten komunikat znaczy, ze jakis admin skasowal grafike z commons. Herr Kriss 18:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

QI - wyjaśnienia

So, propozycje na QI może składać każdy - autor zdjęcia również (tak jest najcześciej). Robi się to za pomocą odpowiedniego szablonu (Nomination). Potem dowolny, zalogowany użytkownik może ocenić czy zdjęcie powinno być QI czy nie. Wyraża to za pomocą zmiany szablonu na Decline lub Promotion oraz opisania i uzasadnienia dlaczego tak uważa (każda ocena musi być uzasadniona). Jeśli ktoś się z tą opinią nie zgadza, wówczas może przenieść zdjęcie do tzw. Consensual Review, gdzie głosuje się w trybie większościowym czy przyznac czy nie, tam też czasami pojawiają się opinie co należałoby zrobić żeby otrzymać QI. Dodam jeszcze, że tak naprawde przez Consensual Review Promotion dostaje mniej zdjęć niż mogłoby się wydawać... Jak masz jeszcze jakieś pytania to mów. Pozdrawiam! --Lestat 13:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wölfelsdorf.JPG

---

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Please remember that all uploads require source, author and license information. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. Siebrand 20:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
This message was placed by an automated process. Please go to Commons:Help desk if you need help.

Image:Wölfelsdorf.JPG and Image:Glatz - herb.JPG

Can you write English description? (Copy from nomination is ok?) Thanks --Beyond silence 23:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I understand you, but if you can write some English at nomination please copy that to the image's summary page! Than other people can read it whoes don't speaking your language. Thanks --Beyond silence 08:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Zdjecia

OK, jedno usunalem, a do drugiego dalem NSD. Herr Kriss 12:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Glatzer Schneeberg 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Planetarium WPKiW1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Planetarium

W wielu miejscach widać lekkie przesunięcia - jakby obraz był składany z mniejszych części, niedokładnie dopasowanych. Zobacz np. to: http://wafel.com/tmp/Planetarium_WPKiW.jpg - takie rzeczy są w wielu miejscach. --Leafnode 13:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Teraz tych uszkodzeń nie ma, ale z kolei zdjęcie jest krzywe ;) Jeśli byś poprawił, to zmienię głos na QI. --Leafnode 14:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Wyprostowałem to zdjęcie i przesłałem nadpisując Twój plik - zdaję się nic nie jest pocięte. Jeśli chcesz, to je zachowaj, jeśli nie, to cofnij zmianę. Co do QI - jeśli chcesz wrzucić inne zdjęcie, to lepiej pod nową nazwą i wstawić je od nowa na QI. --Leafnode 14:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Proposal regarding Commons Photographers categories

Hi, You are currently using a Commons Photographer user template on your user page. It has been proposed to redefine the templates and a vote is currently on-going. If interested, I encourage you to participate in the voting process. -- Slaunger 13:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sunflower 2007.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QIC: Brona 01.JPG

Hi Pudelek, After the rotation adjustment, I noticed that the image became less sharp. It concerned me enough that I tried rotating the original myself in Photoshop and it retained the sharpness. See here: File:Brona 01 edit - Relic38.jpg. You may want to look into why the rotated version became less sharp.
Feel free to update your nomination with this image if you prefer it.
Best regards,
Darren

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brona 02.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brona 01.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brona03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! OL - monument1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QI nomination of Image:Cerkiew w Wierchomli1.jpg

I saw you've moved your QI nomination of that picture to the "Consensual review" without contesting it so I wanted to tell you that's not a thing to do. If you really contest a review, you must be clear about it. If it's just a wish of other people's opinions, it's not following the rules! Indeed, a non-contested reviewed image is automatically declined or promoted (depending on the review of course). The way you behaved could be seen as a way to break the rules by leaving your picture longer than the rules say. Please try not to do that again. Either you accept a review, either you contest it clearly (which was not the case here). Thanks for your comprehension. Regards. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 18:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Muzeum Bierkowice-kuznia 1726.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

QIBot was confused I think and left this for me. -- carol 12:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

It is actually a little late to be asking this, but are these electric lights? -- carol 12:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Willa w Katowicach.

Witam! Mam prośbę: czy mógłbyś zobaczyć i powiedzieć co sądzisz o tym zdjęciu i głosowaniu? -> [1] Byłbym bardzo wdzięczny, bo jest nie rozstrzygnięte, a moim zdaniem to dobre zdjęcie... Pozdrawiam serdecznie! --Lestat 21:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Wielkie dzięki za Twój głos. Mam nadzieję, że pomoże :-) Pozdrawiam i życzę miłej niedzieli! --Lestat 10:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

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

Expedition: Everest picture

Hi Pudelek,

You declined one of my images for Quality Image status because it was tilted. However, I've now fixed the tilt, so I was hoping that you would reevaluate the image. Its nomination is at Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list#Expedition: Everest. Thanks a lot! bdesham ★ 15:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Tyldy

Niestety nie wiem co jest grane z tymi podpisami, ale mam ten sam problem... --Lestat 17:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Beskid Żywiecki - winter 2008.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ostrau - ulice 28 rijna in the evening.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

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

Image:Kezmarok_CoA.svg

Image deletion warning

Image:Kezmarok_CoA.svg 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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek 10:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ostrau_-_ulice28_rijna_in_the_evening.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Ostrau_-_ulice28_rijna_in_the_evening.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek 10:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Miniuni Ostrava - train.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I don't know if it a good model of a Santa Fe train but it is a good photograph of a model train layout. -- CarolSpears 01:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Koribelów-orawa 138.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karwin-Freistadt - foutain.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good --B.navez 10:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Comprachtschütz - zentrum.JPG

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful informations about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Filbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Sz-iwbot 14:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Larix_polonica_-_cone.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Larix_polonica_-_cone.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek 20:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Larix decidua cone.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments The bottom cone is out of focus, but I like the light. Arria Belli 13:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Larix decidua cone - 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good composition, detailed --Ianare 07:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blekitny kwiatek.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice and clear; good colors. Arria Belli 17:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Schronisko Kamieńczyk

Witaj,

Zauważyłem, że Siebrand skasował zdjęcie Image:Kamieńczyk schronisko.JPG jako duplikat zdjęcia Image:Kamieńczyk.JPG, jednak załadowałeś je ponownie. Te zdjęcia faktycznie wydają się identyczne. Jest jakiś cel dla którego obydwa mają być na commons? Pozdrawiam Red 81 08:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Shrine in Sudetes.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharp, well exposed, ok for QI --LC-de 20:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rocks - Große Heuscheuer..jpg

Just a thought - if you could identify the mineral of the alrge rocks at the focus of this picture, its encyclopedic value would shoot up - it would be showing mineral X in its natural environment. It might be granite, but I'm no geologist. Adam Cuerden 01:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Sandstone - sandstone tends to be muich more layered-looking than that. I could believe some sort of Granite, but thn, that's my default guess for any greyish rock. Adam Cuerden 13:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Who am I to argue, then? Let's add it to articles on Sandstone! =) Adam Cuerden 19:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rocks - Große Heuscheuer..jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sure. I like this, particularly the half-seen valley through the mist. It might be an idea to identify what mineral the large rocks are - then it could be used in articles about that rock (Granite, is it?) Adam Cuerden 01:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)  Comment In my opinion this is sandstone --Pudelek 08:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Małe pytanko

Cześć, mam takie małe pytanko. Nie mówie zbyt dobrze po angielsku, a pod moim zdjęciem nominowanym do QI był komentarz w którym nie rozumiem zdania: "But sadly, these images has serious C/A". Mógłbyś mi to przetłumaczyć, żebym wiedział, co jest nie tak? Z góry dziękuję.--Wisnia6522 09:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, dzięki za pomoc --Wisnia6522 07:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rock Twarożnik.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Acceptable for QI, interesting subject -- MJJR 21:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Question: Is Twarożnik/Tvarožník the name of this rock or omething else? Regards --Berru 20:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Mapa

...więc wyślij mi na e-maila lub do "fotosika" tę mapę, na której "wyraźnie" jest zaznaczona granica. Wciąż uważam, że Szczyrk to śląska miejscowość. LUCPOL 21:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Napisałeś "to Oświęcim też jest na Sląsku i Siewierz?" - Oświęcim i Siewierz to byłe ważne śląskie miasta i są tym samym co dla Polski/Małopolski - Lwów. Niby Lwów to ukraińskie miasto, dawniej miasto polskie, obecnie bez polskiej ludności którą wysiedlono, lecz wielu uważa to wciąż za polskie miasto - akurat znajdujące się w obrębie Ukrainy. Siewierz i Oświęcim były zbyt ważnymi miastami dla Śląska aby o nich zapomnieć i się ich (wręcz) wyrzekać. To też nasza historia. To tyle jeśli chodzi o te dwa miasta. Jeśli chodzi o Szczyrk to już tak się przyjęło, że to śląska miejscowość. Tak mnie nauczono, znam wielu co myśli podobnie. Czy to zbieg okoliczności? Nie znam się dokładnie na historii Szczyrku - dlatego nie tworzę tu większych wojen edycyjnych - ale dopóki nie poznam w pełni wiarygodnych źródeł lub map (lub twojej szczerej wypowiedzi - na zaufanie) będę się trzymał mojej wersji. Mimo, że już drugi raz dyskutujemy o Szczyrku to wciąż nie podałeś lat w których Szczyrk znajdował się na terenie Śląska. Zapewne masz mapy Śląska i okolic na przestrzeni 1000 lat, więc możesz sprawdzić, może masz gdzieś jakieś książki gdzie ładnie (i kompetentnie) jest to wyjaśnione. Proszę tylko o tą uczciwą odpowiedź: w jakich latach Szczyrk był na Śląsku. W tej chwili nie wiem czy Szczyrk mam uważać za typową śląską miejscowość czy za odpowiednik Oświęcimia (czyli tylko jakiś okres (jaki?) był na Śląsku). LUCPOL 15:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Malá Úpa - Klein Aupa.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice landscape. -- carol 03:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Śląskie Kamienie - Dívči Kameny.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Technically this photograph is fine and it is nice to look at. The sky is pretty and the composition is good. -- carol 07:50, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Canal lock in Oppeln1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Super unexciting, but the quality is ok. --Dschwen 22:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC), P.S.: Geocoding is always appreciated! --Dschwen 22:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)  Info location is done --Pudelek 10:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Canal lock in Oppeln.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Same here. --Dschwen 22:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Universitäts_Brücke_in_Breslau.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Universitäts_Brücke_in_Breslau.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek (talk) 11:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kamienica pod Siedmioma Elektorami.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments It can be QI - good perspective correction. --Lestath 15:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zobtenberg - hostel.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Lerdsuwa 13:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Roofs in Breslau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Big size makes up for the detail quality. Here the perspective serves its purpose nicely. --Dilaudid 12:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC) Incorrectly named: there is no such city Breslau. --Sfu 20:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)  Commentcorrectly named: for me, for Germans and for many people in Europe and World -Pudelek 07:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Geocoding

Hello Pudelek, I noticed your recent photos from Oslo, you have many nice shots. It is nice that you geocode them, but there are some things that could be improved. One should preferably use the header parameter to show which direction the photo is taken from. And note that you should geocode the location of the camera, not the location of the object you are photographing. See this diff for an example. Regards, --Kjetil_r 07:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oslo - Christian Frederiks plass.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done. Barabas 01:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC) You have missed the square's characteristic “feature” – some hundred drug addicts. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. --Kjetil r 06:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Royal Guardsmans (Hans Majestet Kongens Garde) in Oslo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good shot --Mbdortmund 00:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

File:Roundabout in Oslo.JPG

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Roundabout in Oslo.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great composition! --Specious 01:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oslofjord - view from beach in Oslo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done Barabas 01:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Haakon_VI_Magnusson_statue.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Haakon_VI_Magnusson_statue.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek (talk) 16:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wooden house in Bryggen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments looks like a model... --Mbdortmund 13:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

File:Haakon VII of Norway statue.JPG

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haakon VII of Norway statue.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A well chosen point of view for that type of statue. Clean composition. --Ikiwaner 18:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

It is a QI photo but unfortunately under FOP in Norway the image cant have a free license as FOP doesnt permit commercial use of Artworks where its the clearly the main motive. Gnangarra 15:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Haakon_VII_of_Norway_statue.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Haakon_VII_of_Norway_statue.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Kjetil_r 13:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Men at the airport - Pyrzowice.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment It needs to more explanation for this image. _Fukutaro 14:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Technically good action photograph. What are the grease marks on the pavement? -- carol 21:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)  Comment I don't no, maybe some oil or grease? --Pudelek 22:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Mechanics directing the ground aircarrier traffic? -- carol 22:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Probably this is Ground Controller --Pudelek 22:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Are you saying that the Ground Controller(s) made those greasy footprints? -- carol 00:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Water taxi in Oslo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit dull light, but technically fine. Lycaon 18:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spiterstulen campsite.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Maybe too dark, but for me it's good for QI. --Lestath 16:11, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trail blazing in Jotunheimen.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Solid work --LC-de 18:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bergen - Lille Lungegårdsvannet .jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice picture. --Sfu 20:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bridge over Visa river.JPG

Sorry, I made it wrong not intentionnally when I put the link to the french article. Thanks for the corrections. --B.navez (talk) 14:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bridge over Visa river.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting and unusual bridge, good quality picture (ale co napisany?) --B.navez 18:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Image:Visa_valley_in_Jotunheimen.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Visa_valley_in_Jotunheimen.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek (talk) 16:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jotunheimen mountains.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good composition, sharp, clouds almost too white, but not. -- carol 10:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Churche in Kvam.jpg

Hi Marcin,

I did some minor tweaks on your beautiful image. Feel free to revert if you don't like them. Cheers. Lycaon (talk) 09:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Stained_glass_in_Saint_Wenceslas_cathedral,_Olomouc.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Stained_glass_in_Saint_Wenceslas_cathedral,_Olomouc.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Pudelek (talk) 10:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Knut Voles hytte1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments By Thor, what a cap at the top !--B.navez 20:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Knut Voles hytte.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality; good lighting, especially on the snow. Vassil 08:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Harbour in Hovedøya.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments hypsch --Mbdortmund 12:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jotunheimen mountains3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good perspective, good atmosphere. --B.navez 19:59, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! New Opera in Oslo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 22:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Question Would it not be better to put Planetarium Śląskie as scope, as that is the official (Polish) name? Lycaon (talk) 14:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

  ok :) --Pudelek (talk) 14:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

•  Comment I think that the Category:Buildings in Chorzów should go to the Category:Silesian Planetarium because there is a few pictures of this building. --Sfu (talk) 12:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
•  SupportVote inserted as it seems evident that this is the intention of the voter, who also changed the status to supported. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)Satisfies all criteria. --Sfu (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. --Sfu (talk) 09:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Motorboat in Oslofjord.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good sharpness and exposure, might improved if the boat was to the right of center, but I think it passes the requirements. TimVickers 17:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tower in Tønsberg.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Would be better without the people on the left, but it meets the requirements. TimVickers 04:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tønsberg - tower and ruins.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets QI requirements, even if the colors aren't that good (bad color temperature setup). --LC-de 10:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Visdalen valley in Jotunheimen.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Technically good. --Aqwis 07:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Akershus festning.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments This image is slightly unsharp, but it has no major flaws. Ram-Man 21:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tower in Tønsberg1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jotunheimen - view from Galdhøpiggen1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Castle in Olsztyn1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think this one is the best of the sequence (in spite of the tourists and the strange aspect of grass in the bottom right corner). --Eusebius 16:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Castle in Olsztyn.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. Thegreenj 21:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tønsbergfjorden in Tønsberg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit too soft but I think it's OK for QI. Dori 17:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reenactors in Austerlitz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments please add a personal rights warning --Mbdortmund 16:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)  Info Done -Pudelek 17:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tram in Brünn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done urban scene --B.navez 11:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mohyla míru - Austria.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think it is ok, nice light on the shield --Lucarelli 23:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Květná zahrada - galerie.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice perspective. --Lestath 17:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Opolska Wenecja - kamieniczki.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Should be a bit sharper but quite good picture and very interesting perspective and reflection. Though I wonder what does Richard Gere do on the balcony ? --B.navez 14:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arcibiskupský zámek Kroměříž -1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not very exciting but beautiful place and good quality picture --B.navez 14:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tatra 603 MB.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Why "prototype" in the scope? I would be happy with "Tatra 603 MB", even if this particular one is a prototype. --Eusebius (talk) 14:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

 Info - ok, now is only Tatra 603 MB --Pudelek (talk) 15:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me. There is another picture of the van, but of lesser quality. --Eusebius (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 18:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stained glass in Saint Maurice churche, Olomouc.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I see no flaws here. --Sfu 11:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Geocoding

Witam! Rano miałem mało czasu, ale teraz mogę na spokojnie odpowiedzieć. Szczerze powiedziawszy pierwszy raz spotkałem się z czymś takim jak heading w geocodingu. Rano poprostu porównałem swój do Twojego i zmieniłem tak żeby było podobnie, ale nie o to chodziło... Teraz już chyba obaj wiemy w czym rzecz, ale kurcze... czy to naprawdę jest konieczne... ja myślę, że nie ma co przesadzać. Pozdrawiam! --Lestat (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mühlgraben in Oppeln.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Possibly the focus is slightly too close, but I think this is a worthy image. Mattbuck 14:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Wanderer W51.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Weak support, I would prefer a higher resultion. Do you know the year of manufacture of this exemplar? (And where are the four rings from the radiator grill?) --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 Info I know only year of manufacture - 1936. --Pudelek (talk) 08:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Weak support I think it just meets the VI criteria. My biggest concern in the relevance of the scope which is the town hall in a town with a population of about 300 people. Does that mean we will accept town halls from any minor town in the world? Hmm.. Not always, I would say, but in this case I think it is OK. The building itself seems to be "above average", and the fact that the image is in fact already used in four different language Wikipedia seems to underline its value. It would be nice if you would add a heading to the geocode. That gives a nice pointer on Google maps/Google earth. Admittedly, I do not understand any of the languages in which the articles are written, so I do not have a clear impression of what makes the town/building interesting. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Satifies all criteria. You can improve the geocoding by ading a heading. But I am sure you know that already ;-) -- Slaunger (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I'd rather see this picture with some better lighting, but otherwise it looks great and satisfies the criteria. -- J.smith (talk) 17:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support

=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 10:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#September_27.2C_2008

Hi,

I've tried correcting the tilt of Image:Appartment buildings at Praia da Rocha, Portimão.jpg, could you review it again on COM:QIC?

Thanks, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 09:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! River Bøvra in Lom.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough, though on the soft side -- Alvesgaspar 11:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Image-Stained_glass_in_Katowice_(Kattowitz)1.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Image-Stained_glass_in_Katowice_(Kattowitz)1.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Teofilo (talk) 15:43, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Stained_glass_in_Katowice_(Kattowitz).jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Stained_glass_in_Katowice_(Kattowitz).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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Teofilo (talk) 16:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Tatra T2 603 Rallye.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Oppose IMHO scope is to limited when constrained to the Rallye Monte Carlo version (this may be adequate for legendary rallye cars as the Mini Cooper or the Lancia Stratos). Unfortunately you have cut off a part of the car. So if you change the scope to Tatra 603 there is a great number of pictures and I'm not sure to change my vote to promote. And it would also be a good idea to add the year of manufacturing in the description, independent from the nomination. --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 Info I change scope to Tatra 603 Rallye (this is special version: T2, or Tatra Monte Carlo or Rallye - last description is in Transport Museum in Bratislava) --Pudelek (talk) 17:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 Neutral Thinking ... --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

•  Support I'm ok with the new scope. --Eusebius (talk) 19:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support finished thinking ;-) --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 09:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stained glass in Nysa cathedral.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good foto, terrible window --Mbdortmund 13:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint Joseph in Neisse.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good light, good composition. Vassil 22:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Question Is it necessary to keep the Norwegian term for "fortress"? It seems to me that we could translate it (the english article is named Akershus fortress, for instance). --Eusebius (talk) 11:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Info, yes, I know, but in german "Festung", polish "Twierdza" or "Forteca", french "citadelle"... i think that original version is the best, but I will not be persisted. --Pudelek (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there is an ongoing discussion about scope languages. --Eusebius (talk) 14:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

•  Comment Please change the scope to "Akershus fortress" as the discussion seems to agree on using the English term. We can later make a framework which facilitates translations to the users preferred language. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Info - Ok, done :) --Pudelek (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 20:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Weak support There is vast amount of images of this fortress. The lightning of the nominated candidates is really quite dull, but I still think it is slightly better at illustrating the scope than competing images. What a small world, I just realized i was positioned right next to it when I took this (equally dull) image of Aker Brygge this spring -- Slaunger (talk) 20:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support It is never easy to illustrate a town well with a single image, but I think this one does a good job with an edge compared to competing images. Satisfies other criteria. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Info poor quality (scan), but this is only one photo from Gerulata in Wikipedia --Pudelek (talk) 10:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 11:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 10:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

MP

Gościowi się coś pokręciło, ale chyba już zmienił głos... --Lestat (talk) 21:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eingang in Neisse Kathedrale.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough, there is a small tilt to the right though. --Massimo Catarinella 11:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altvater - OT.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments This one seems to be sharper than the other one. --Berthold Werner 17:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue in Oppeln.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great sharpness --Massimo Catarinella 21:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Question Why not point out the buildings on a copy of your panoramic instead? Even if not all the buildings are identified, I think it would be better. --Eusebius (talk) 21:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Info - ok, though former photo is described and not distorted --Pudelek (talk) 21:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Er, well, you're not forced to do whatever I say! My ideas might not always be the best ones and I'm sure you're not begging for votes. Besides, switching pictures in the middle of the review process is a bit odd. About the distortion, I usually have no problem with it for a VI (but again, it's only me). About the buildings, a copy could be made with the identification just the way you've done it for the other one, right? I think the identification on the former pic makes it more valuable (without any identification, I would have preferred the panorama). --Eusebius (talk) 21:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I have uploaded version this photo with full english description --Pudelek (talk) 09:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

•  Support I think it is the "most valued" now. --Eusebius (talk) 09:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 06:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Drogi Pudelku

Dziękując za poparcia oraz za konstruktywną krytykę :-) chciałbym dwiedzieć się jak tam twoje umiejętości lingwistycznej. Pod moim zdjęciem pojaił się komentarz, którego nie mogę zrozumieć: Have you got the allowance to take pictures inside the museum? Może jesteś wstanie mi pomóc? Albertus teolog (talk) 08:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Dzięki Wodzu i gratuluję kolejnego QI. Albertus teolog (talk) 12:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pomnik Harcerzy Września 03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments how about a description in English? --Mbdortmund 15:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)  Info - done --Pudelek 16:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC) picture is good --Mbdortmund 10:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Info english scope or polish name Beskid Żywiecki?

•  Support Valuable because of the large panorama and descriptions. Albertus teolog (talk) 15:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 16:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pigeon - sculpture in Ober Lazisk.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets all criteria --Twdragon 22:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jesień w Sądeckim3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice view. --Dschwen 16:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Looks ok to me, although I can read none of the available articles. I suppose that if this place is worth an article, then it is worth a VI scope. --Eusebius (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 11:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bergen - Torget panorama.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks ok to me. I think it is a bit dark. --Eusebius 13:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jesień w Sądeckim1.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Info one of the longest valleys in Jotunheimen --Pudelek (talk) 09:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

•  Support --Lestat (talk) 15:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment Jotunheimen would definitely be worth a scope, but I'm not sure it is the case for Visdalen valley. --Eusebius (talk) 15:37, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment Also not convinced why a valley would be more valuable than a peninsula. Lycaon (talk) 19:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>

Promoted. -- Lycaon (talk) 19:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral in Opole (Oppeln).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I wouldn't have centred the subject, but it looks better here than on the wider view. --Eusebius 09:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Opolska Wenecja nocą1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice colours and reflects --Böhringer 21:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Oppeln by night1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Quality looks ok, but I really don't like the centred composition. --Eusebius 08:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC) Very nice. It's not doubt for QI. _Fukutaro 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Correct exposure and lights. -- ComputerHotline (talk) 08:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

   Comment Yes, but it is not a QI review... I'm actually worried by the fact that the building from which the picture has been taken (Jasna Góra monastery) might be of importance in a representative view of the city. It is very visible, with a specific design and might be a part of the city's image. --Eusebius (talk) 10:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 21:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Christmas review!

Hi Pudelek/Archive1. I would like to thank you for the interest you have shown in my request for adminship, and for the time you have taken to review my profile. As a Christmas present I've just been given the admin tools, for which I'm thankful as well. I have understood all the remarks that have been made during the review period. I will take them into account and begin using the tools with much care, until I gain more experience and self-confidence. Thanks again, and Merry Christmas! --Eusebius (talk) 15:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pharmacy in Plzeň.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments It's OK. --Lestath 14:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Viribus Unitis - stained glass in Kutna Hora.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good work --Böhringer 23:38, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chrám svaté Barbory - Kutná Hora.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good quality and composition -- Alvesgaspar 12:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Andrzejówka bufet.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough -- Alvesgaspar 13:04, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Zawołanie

W rzeczy samej :-) Albertus teolog (talk) 09:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

zdjęcie roku

Szczerze powiedziawszy jeszcze nie próbowałem głosować, więc nie wiem, ale jak to zrobię i mi się uda to dam znać! Pozdrawiam serdecznie i gratuluję ładnego witraża! --Lestat (talk) 15:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Prague Castle Guard - winter.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I like this picture. Imo the composition is perfect. --Kirq 17:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support OK for me, closest competitor would be this one, which shows the bottom better but is of lower quality. I took the liberty to add a link in the scope, to the city gallery on Commons. --Eusebius (talk) 09:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 22:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Vitus Cathedral - Stained glass.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good for a stained glass window. Geotag would be nice. --Eusebius 12:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)  Info Done --Pudelek 12:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chata Skalka.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments red person a little distracting, otherwise good --Ianare 19:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Great photos, Pudelek!
Some color corrections

original -- seems a bit dark

suggested

Featured Picture promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Viribus Unitis - stained glass in Kutna Hora.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Viribus Unitis - stained glass in Kutna Hora.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

GnM

Witam. Rzuciłem okiem na Twoją galerię, uważam, że robisz genialne zdjęcia. Zgłosiłem jeden z Twoich witraży do Grafiki na medal na plwiki. Poza tym, bardzo mi się podoba ten gwardzista, zamierzasz nominować? Pozdrawiam.--Adi (talk) 02:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Praying Virgin

Hi Pudelek, your image of the praying Virgin statue has been used, with many thanks to you, in a video on YouTube:
Prayer to the Virgin
I hope you like the result.
Kind regards
David
Dwsolo (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moravskoslezské Beskydy.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments That is lovely. It's a shame the sun wasn't a bit higher to pick out the trees in the foreground better - maybe the image would be better if the bottom were cropped a bit. But truly breathtaking. Mattbuck 02:42, 31 January 2009 (UTC)