User talk:Archaeodontosaurus/Première année

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Archaeodontosaurus!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 05:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Florine taillée.jpg is uncategorized since 15 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Cassis madagascariensis.jpg is uncategorized since 15 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Fasciolaria.jpg is uncategorized since 15 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Cassis rufa.jpg is uncategorized since 15 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Fasciolaria tulipa.jpg is uncategorized since 15 March 2009. BotMultichillT 05:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
• Image:Carrollite.jpg is uncategorized since 29 March 2009.
• Image:TOPAZE7.jpg is uncategorized since 6 June 2009.
• Image:Cristobalite2.jpg was uncategorized on 13 August 2009.
• Image:Legrandite2.jpg was uncategorized on 26 August 2009.

categories en Anglais

Bonjour, bienvenue sur Commons. Merci de noter que les catégories doivent etre an Anglais, par exemple Copper plutot que Cuivre. Bien à vous, Frédéric (talk) 12:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fasciolaria tulipaProfils.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. --Johannes Robalotoff 19:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 23:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cypraecassis rufaGlobal.png, 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. --Johannes Robalotoff 13:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Feijoa sellowiana .jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Cayambe 15:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dardanus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Very good. Yann 07:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! HexaplexcichoreumProfils.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 - Darius Baužys 19:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Image need title changing

Hello, this image is a shell of Cassis cornuta Linnaeus, 1758.

. The title needs to be changed. Thanks very much, 24.215.213.21 18:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC) (User:Invertzoo on the English Wikipedia.)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! HeulanditeLonavala.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Mbdortmund 21:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spondylus.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 Awesome DOF. Leonardorejorge

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ActinolitePortugual.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 and useful. --Cayambe 20:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Calcite-Maroc-UV.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good and useful --Mbdortmund 11:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Murier.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, 'odd' leaf well shown. With a slight regret for the tight crop at right. --Cayambe 08:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! RagondinCrâne.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 --George Chernilevsky 17:49, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GorillaSkull.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 --George Chernilevsky 20:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

QI votes

Bonjour, Didier Descouens!

Me plaisent vos travaux. C'est les photos excellentes.

Une petite précision pour les QI candidats:

/Promotion | - Incorrectement (le robot QICbot ne peut pas travailler cela).

/Promotion| - Correctement

Respectueusement, -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! VautourCrane2.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 anyway, only the nose is a little overexposured and it leans a bit to red. Can you repair that? --Mbdortmund 21:17, 3 November 2009 (UTC)  Done he drank! Archaeodontosaurus 17:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC) *g* good now --Mbdortmund 22:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

VI corrigé

Bonjour, Didier Descouens!

J'ai corrigé votre nomination. Une principale erreur est Espace typographique au début du nom. En supplément j'ai corrigé la présentation.

Utilisez cela comme l'exemple pour vos nominations ultérieures.

|scope=''[[:Category:Hexaplex cichoreum|Hexaplex cichoreum]]'' (Endive murex)
|usedin=[[:en:Hexaplex]], [[:en:Hexaplex cichoreum]], [[:fr:Hexaplex cichoreum]]

Devant la nomination et avant le vote il est nécessaire d'étudier six critères. Commons:Critères des images de valeur

Si vous faites la nomination de la photo du studio, indiquez sur cela évidemment. Dans les autres cas il faut indiquer absolument les coordonnées géographiques.

Il ne m'est pas difficile de corriger votre nomination. J'aussi faisais plus tôt les erreurs, et ils étaient corrigés par les utilisateurs expérimentés.

P.S. Je ne connais pas la langue française. J'utilise pour le virement le site www.translate.ru. Comment vous estimez la qualité de la traduction ?

Respectueusement -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Phyllacanthus.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 DOF! --Yerpo 16:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Limules.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 Excellent and very useful. --Cayambe 11:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC) tried to say this in the same moment --Mbdortmund 11:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)  Comment In the descr., could you please add where it does come from? --Cayambe 11:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC) Done pleased Archaeodontosaurus 14:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodonite Australie.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, but the crop is too tight IMO.--Mbz1 19:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhodonite.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good image.--Mbz1 19:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Etrilledos.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 photo --George Chernilevsky 16:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Napa Valley

Hello. Thank you for voting on my image. I added alternative here. May I please ask you to take a look at it, if you have a time? Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:10, 14 November 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:
Hexaplex cichoreum (Endive murex).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Not geocoded, but it is clear combination of two studio shot. Geocode not applicable in fact. All criteria met,  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Agree with George - Darius Baužys ^{→ talk} 16:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:55, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PhlogopiteMonteSommaIII.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 as always.--Mbz1 22:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SideriteBresil2.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 Lovely. You might want to look into a few small blue fringes, but it's good enough for QI already. --99of9 09:16, 15 November 2009 (UTC)  Done Correction made ... partly, thank you Archaeodontosaurus 13:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cobaltosmithsonite.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 -- George Chernilevsky 19:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Soufre&gypse sicile.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 00:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! FluoriteValzergueFillonjaune.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and useful. --Cayambe 08:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Valued image candidates/Ettringite.jpg

Bonjour DD (si vous me permettez cette familiarité, aussitôt suivie du tutoiement, si vous n'y voyiez pas d'inconvénient :-),
En réponse à ta perplexité, "le domaine n'est pas une simple description de votre image. Il définit plutôt un champ générique ou une catégorie dont l'image est l'exemple de plus grande valeur." Ceci est expliqué plus en détail sur la page en français Commons:Domaine des images de valeur.
Merci d'avoir ainsi rectifié le "scope" de l'image nominée ; tu pourrais également lier ce domaine à la catégorie Commons correspondante, en intégrant le lien ainsi :
|scope=[[:Category:Ettringite|Ettringite]] ( Done par Eusebius entre-temps :-)
Les éventuels évaluateurs pourront ainsi comparer l'image nominée avec les autres images de la catégorie, pour décider si effectivement, l'image nominée est celle ayant la plus grande valeur dans le domaine proposé.
Merci de ta participation aux « Images de Valeur » ; par ailleurs, n'hésite pas à donner ton avis sur les autres images nominées, en vérifiant qu'elles respectent bien les 6 critères demandés. En effet, nous manquons cruellement d'évaluateurs-naturalistes en ce moment ! En restant à ton écoute, et bien amicalement, --Myrabella (talk) 13:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Bonjour, Archaeodontosaurus. Voilà déjà quelque temps que je voulais te le dire : je suis très contente que tu sois devenu un contributeur régulier aux VI, tant comme nominateur que comme évaluateur. Et je suis contente aussi que la langue ne soit pas une telle barrière, après tout. Le projet VI ne peut que bénéficier de tes apports. Bien amicalement, --Myrabella (talk) 09:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

FP candidate

Bonjour, Didier!

Cette photo File:Apophyllitestilbite.jpg bon pour la nomination Featured picture candidate.
Je soutiendrai.
Respectueusement, --George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Apophyllitestilbite.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 High quality and nice -- George Chernilevsky 11:04, 28 November 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:
Ettringite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Request This is not a scope, but a description. Please format the scope as asked; something like “Ettringite” could be suitable, I guess. :-) --Myrabella (talk) 09:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 13:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 22:04, 2 December 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:
Desert rose.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support best version imo. -- Der Wolf im Wald (talk) 19:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 08:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Celestine-Valguarnera.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 Excellent. --Cayambe 14:16, 6 December 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:
jamesonite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 11:45, 10 December 2009 (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:
Annabergite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good contribution. Well illustrative, criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 11:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Bonjour de France

(J’ai vu que tu utilisais mes photographies en minéralogie. C’est un honneur pour moi et je t’en remercie. Bon souvenir de France, Bien amicalement)
Ich sah, dass ihr meine Fotos in der Mineralogie. Es ist eine Ehre für mich, und ich danke Ihnen. Gute Erinnerungen an Frankreich, Mit freundlichen Grüßen http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Archaeodontosaurus Archaeodontosaurus 12:42, 29. Nov. 2009 (CET) :Hallo Archaeodontosaurus, (Deine Bilder sind wirklich sehr schön und ich hoffe, es kommen noch viele. Vielen Dank für Deine Mühe. Beste Grüße aus Deutschland) :Tes images sont vraiment très belles et moi espèrent, encore beaucoup viennent. Merci beaucoup pour ton effort. Les meilleures salutations d'Allemagne -- Ra'ike ^Disk. _LKU ^WPMin 15:20, 29. Nov. 2009 (CET) :Tes images sont superb. Merci beaucoup! – Klasse Bilder, ich bin begeisert. :-) -- Schwalbe Disk. 21:34, 29. Nov. 2009 (CET)

Geotags

Merci pour l'explication, qui me convainc, sur ma page de discussion. Cordialement, --Cayambe (talk) 11:49, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Emeraude Musso.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Cayambe 18:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Soufresicile2.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 vote on my nomination

Hello, thank you for voting on my nomination. I uploaded a new (improved IMO) version over old file. I know it is a very bad practice to do it during FPC process and I am sorry about this. May I please ask you to review the image one more time and to change your vote, if you believe my changes were bad. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trémolite-Barège.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 Excellent. Please, add geotag. --Cayambe 10:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Comment Mineral from the nineteenth century, geotag impossible -- Archaeodontosaurus 11:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC).  Comment Ok. --Cayambe 11:53, 12 December 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:
Sulfur.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support; satisfies 5 criteria. I agree with the geocoding exception. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 22:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GalèneJoplinII.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Cayambe 08:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Crapaud : un beau male!

Salut ! Merci pour tes encouragements et de ton soutien, j'avais lancé le truc un peu juste "pour voir", car je trouvais cette photo réussie (même si j'ai pas un super matos ). Coââ que soit le résultat, je ne me formaliserai pas ! Cordialement, Totodu74 (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ChalcanthitefranceII.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Beautiful, thanks. --99of9 10:41, 21 December 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:
brazilianite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support after secondary look. Most commonly color: not very green and not very yellow, criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 14:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tremolite Campolungo.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... and very useful. --Cayambe 19:41, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The Stone Barnstar

		The Stone Barnstar for science about minerals
		La récompense de la science sur les minéraux. Les photos faites par vous est excellent et très nécessaire. --George Chernilevsky talk 13:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

:)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! --George Chernilevsky ^talk

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anatase Oisans.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. --Cayambe 19:21, 25 December 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:
Francevillite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Very good nomination. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 08:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Fauvette à tête noire

Bonjour et merci pour l'encouragement. Je vais en effet placer prochainement cette image sur la liste des candidats Images de valeur. Bonne et heureuse année 2010, avec, je l'espère, beaucoup d'autres images naturalistes, de minéraux notamment. --Cayambe (talk) 16:01, 31 December 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:
Hemimorphite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support very good photo. All several other good imeages in scope by same Author. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dolomite-Magnésite- Navarre.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 15:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dioptasetsumeb5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 15:55, 2 January 2010 (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:
Kutnohorite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Only 3 photos in scope exist. This one is better. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Slaunger (talk) 19:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

VI

Bonjour, Didier!

1. Essayez changer le domaine |scope=[[Carcharodontosaurus]], tooth

2. J'ai essayé faire la photo avec le fond noir. C'est votre conseil. Ici le premier résultat File:Cymatium_lotorium_2010_G1.jpg

3.File:Carcharodontosaurus saharicus Dent.jpg bon pour QI.

Respectueusement, George

--George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Cette nomination sur votre proposition:

Commons:Valued image candidates/Limnodromus scolopaceus.jpg

Respectueusement, --George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Carcharodontosaurus saharicus DentII.jpg

Yaurait pas une ligne verticale bizarre, sur toute la hauteur de l'image, à peu près au niveau du milieu de la vue de profil ? --Eusebius (talk) 15:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barite FRIZINGTON.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, excellent quality --George Chernilevsky 11:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Freibergite

Bonjour, Didier!
J'ai ajouté la description russe et a corrigé le format.
Un tel format est traduit automatiquement dans de diverses langues.

• |Source={{own}} Cela a l'air ainsi :Own work
• |Date=2009-04-27

Date=YYYY-MM-DD

Respectueusement, George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 16:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I have placed copy of this promotion on your page. J'ai placé la copie de cette promotion sur ta page
--George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Carcharodontosaurus saharicus DentIII.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! Barite Sardaigne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good quality, nice object --George Chernilevsky 07:18, 15 January 2010 (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:
Freibergite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support only 2 photos exist in scope. This one far better shows crystall of this mineral --George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

 Support - Tiptoety ^talk 08:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Cimetière de Nice

Bonjour, oui, j'avais visité les cimetières (catho et juif) de Nice en 2008, mais sans prendre de photos. Il est vrai qu'il y a des tombes intéressantes... et qu'on a une vue superbe sur la ville. Donc si tu retournes à Nice, n'hésite pas à placer tes photos sur Commons. Il y a beaucoup de place ici :-) Cordialement, Claude / --Cayambe (talk) 10:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gluck2.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 --George Chernilevsky 11:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Byssolite France.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and useful. --Cayambe 18:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Copper

Bonjour Didier!

File:Cu-Scheibe.JPG se trouve déjà au domaine Copper.

Tentez d'échanger scope = Copper extraction ou crystals of native copper ou native copper

Bien amicalement --George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:26, 19 January 2010 (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:
cuprite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

I have read article in Russian Wiki and after that my voting is  Support. Well illustrative and rare photo, best in scope. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 05:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CalciteTarn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and useful. --Cayambe 20:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Natroliteinde1.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 --George Chernilevsky 16:32, 23 January 2010 (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:
native copper.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Natural view of crystallized copper, isn't cleared by an acid. Used in 95 projects. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 08:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! L'Iris Daum.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 -George Chernilevsky 11:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Skuttérudite.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and useful. --Cayambe 15:13, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour

Bonjour Archaeodontosaurus,

Thank you for your French messages on my talk page. I have already studied the first one in great detail several times yesterday evening (and I am still trying to decrypt it), and I have done a one-time read-through of the second message. Let's make an experiment. Right now, I have not started my French classes (first lesson is this evening), and I've never learned any French in school. Later today (before my first class) I will try to write down my understanding of the messages on my talk page (without cheating with autotranslators, dictionaries, etc.) and post them, and then you can evaluate which level of Frech I should put on my user page in my babel box. My guess is that it is either fr-0 or fr-1 .

Med venlig hilsen --Slaunger (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Selpologne.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 an useful. --Leuo 21:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Bonsoir

Bonsoir Archaeodontosaurus,

Mercí for showing me that article regarding the English museums. I had to cheat and use an autotranslator to understand the article you linked to. The initiative to let amateur photographers take images and license them freely this way on Commons is truly great.

I think we had a mutual misunderstading/confusion in one of our earlier communications. I wrote about visiting a nice place in French terrritory. With nice I meant pleasant (plaisir?), not the village Nice . Actually, I was referring to Guadeloupe as the (hopefully) pleasant place.

I had my premier French lesson hier. I really find the prenounciation rules confusing and with no obvious relation between the letters used in the words and how they are pronounced. But the spoken language is beautiful (as long as I keep my bouche closed, that is). Danes are typically not very articulate in their spoken language. In addition, we are not particularly expressive in the gestures used while speaking. So, I've tried hard to learn myself to say "C'est trop cher!" with great passion while waving le bras and rolling my yeux.

Counting is a bit hard (difficile) as well, especially realising, that, e.g., 97 is pronounced 4*20+17 (quattre-vingt dix-sept). Counting in Danish is even worse though.

Cordialement, --Slaunger (talk) 22:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zoïsite.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 and fascinating. --Iotatau 21:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Aragonite

Bonjour, Je me suis permis de modifier ta photo d'une fistuleuse que je trouve particulièrement intéressante,bravo pour ce premier pas vers la minéralogie qui est très prometteur. Clin --Archaeodontosaurus (d) 07:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Laquelle ? --ComputerHotline (d) 12:53, 7 February 2010 (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:
Apatite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support A studio shot, all other criteria met, well illustrative --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

•  Weak oppose Vote changed. --Slaunger (talk) 22:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC) I agree it is a very nice studio shot of Apatite (and Calcite). Looking through the category there are very many images and it is also clear that the visual appearance varies greatly from sample to sample. There are also different variants of apatite, which further complicates matters. Therefore I am very much in doubt as to how the most best and most representative image is to be found. My second thought was that, OK, since it is used on so many Wikipedias (and I checked a few, where it is used as lead image), it must be because some domain experts within the realm of apatite have picked this particular image for a specific reason. However, then I noticed that the photo was only created less than two weeks ago, and I began to look at the page histories. For the ones I checked, the creator had simply replaced an existing lead image, e.g., File:Apatite crystals.jpg without any comments in the edit summary. I checked the discussion pages on en and de, and there was no sign that a replacement had been discussed or agreed upon (nobody has reverted either, but that may be due to low edit traffic). The previous image on en and de, File:Apatite crystals.jpg only showed the mineral, whereas the nominated image shows the mineral together with another mineral, calcite, which is almost as prominent in the image. Whereas I do not mind that a subject is put in context by showing it interplaying with other subjects, I am a little concerned that the calcite is so prominent in the image that an observer could be in doubt which part of the image actually illustrates the scope. The annotations help in resolving this, but anyway... So at this stage not convinced and a little suspicious about the creators objective with replacing the lead image in all those articles without any discussion. I am listening though, if there are good arguments...--Slaunger (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment The multiplicity of forms of Apatite is specific to this species (see the etymology of the name).

I am pleased to take care of the iconography of mineralogy on all wikis (I have trouble with many languages I do not know) because the illustrations are in most cases appalling. The previous image showed two pieces of crystals off matrix, that is proposed is Dual ended and 10 times larger. Able to show the crystal on matrix is extremely important for science (identification of the deposit at first glance, the status of mineral deposit, etc ...) the argument of the matrix is not admissible. This piece is among the best known for this mineral. And if we try ,together, to raise the level? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

• •  Comment I am almost convinced, especially about the imprtance of showing the mineral on a matrix. Do you happen to have a source specifying that this piece is among the best known for this mineral? I agree with your objective in trying, together, to raise the level. I also acknowledge that you are a domain expert and I have no professional expertise within this realm. That is why I am willing to listen to good arguments. --Slaunger (talk) 08:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
    • I am very telling to see that we can discuss between us. I am suffering from a disease I'm a collector of minerals but especially ... dinosaur. This piece of Apatite come from the « Ecole des Mines de Paris » in which I traded there for… 25 years. I want to get what's best in earth sciences on WK. But as private collectors are very reserved, I began to seek the museums. This month we will sign a Memorandum between « Wikimedia France » and the Museum of Toulouse for photographing the collection of prehistory of this museum ; is the richest in the world but who are not exposed. If I as errors, it's because of the enthusiasm, our adventure is particularly exciting...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
      •  Support OK, you have convinced me! --Slaunger (talk) 22:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kunzite Nouristan.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 quality --George Chernilevsky 15:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MarcassiteII.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 Slight CA but otherwise good and interesting. --Iotatau 07:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Village Gran Roque

Bonjour Didier, je t'ai répondu sur ma page de discussion. A suivre :-) --Myrabella (talk) 17:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Didier, Je t'en prie, n'hésite pas à évaluer aussi les images de paysages, bâtiments et monuments, même si c'est parfois plus compliqué que les sujets de sciences naturelles. Certes, il faut vérifier la notoriété du domaine proposé (quelle chance vous avez, vous experts en plantes et animaux, dont le domaine peut être défini au niveau de l'espèce, et pour lesquels il existe une classification hiérarchique rigoureuse !) et souvent faire un peu de ménage pour ranger les images relevant du domaine dans les bonnes catégories Commons. Cela demande plus de boulot pour les évaluateurs, un peu d'apprentissage aussi, mais pour les candidats, c'est toujours bien de recevoir plus d'un avis, surtout quand l'évaluation n'est pas évidente ! Bien amicalement --Myrabella (talk) 11:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

J'appuie dans le même sens ! Le but des VIs c'est de devenir, disons, comme la banque de photos d'une grosse encyclopédie. Il faut de tout, dont des paysages, des villes, des illustrations de concepts abstraits, etc. Et tout le monde est expert pour juger de cela. --Berru (talk) 22:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Merci de vos encouragements je suivrais vos conseils --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:44, 14 February 2010 (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:
Anyolite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support It is difficult to choose. However this variant is well documented and shows variant with 3 components --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 10:22, 13 February 2010 (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:
Tanazanite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good nomination. Shows both variants: the stone in the nature and as jewelry. The one competitor exist, but far too small. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 10:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! DanburiteMexique.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 --George Chernilevsky 09:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alligator Crâne et Mandibule.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and valuable. --Iotatau 12:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Les félicitations

Je vous souhaite bon anniversaire!

Je vous souhaite bon anniversaire!
Je vous souhaite du bonheur, la santé et de grands succès créateurs!
Aujourd'hui je lève la coupe du vin rouge pour votre fête!

Votre ami --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Merci Georges. Tu es un véritable ami. Cet après midi nous avions une réunion entre WIKIMEDIA-France et la Ville de TOULOUSE. Nous avons conclu un protocole d’accord entre les archives de la ville et surtout le muséum d’Histoire naturelle. Pour la premier fois des wikipédiens vont pouvoir faire des photographies des pièces qui ne sont pas exposées et les verser directement dans COMMONS. Nous avons choisi le thème de la préhistoire, car les collections à Toulouse sont très riches. Pendant la réunion chacun a dit pourquoi il collaborait avec WIKIPEDIA. Quand çà a été mon tour j’ai dis le bonheur que j’ai d’avoir pu échanger des idées avec des personnes que je n’aurais jamais pu rencontrer sans cela, des français bien sûr, un danois, un luxembourgeois, et surtout un ami en Ukraine qui me fais regretter de ne pas parler le Russe. Je qui est amusant c’est qu’en rentrant j’avais ton message. WIKIPEDIA est une belle aventure. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Parfaitement! Wikipedia est une belle aventure. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Paris, le 1er décembre 2009

Le bruit de ma photo place de la Concorde :-) Je dois dire que je suis d'accord avec le rejet (même si cela fait toujours un petit peu mal..)
En effet, il pleuvait ce jour-là sur Paris... Quel hasard ! Il est bien possible que nous nous sommes croisés sur la place de la Concorde ce jour-là. Ce sera pour un autre jour, peut-être. Amicalement, Claude --Cayambe (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2010 (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:
Chamosite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Strong support High-quality and well documented. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 08:18, 18 February 2010 (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:
stannite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met for a studio shot. Best in scope --George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 08:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Reconfirm votes at Commons:Valued image candidates/Adonis-microcarpa001.jpg

User:Lycaon changed the scope by adding the English popular name. Please reconfirm your votes at Commons:Valued image candidates/Adonis-microcarpa001.jpg. MathKnight 15:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zinnwaldite2.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 --George Chernilevsky 18:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Semseyit

Bonjour, Didier!
Que vous pensez sur cela: File:Semseyit_-_Kisbanya,_Karpathen.jpg?
La photo à titre du concurrent? La réponse pouvez écrire ici et en français.
Respectueusement --George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:19, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Bonsoir Georges,

La semseyite est une espèce minérale qui n’est pas esthétique. J’ai passé une partie de mon dimanche a casser des échantillons pour essayer de trouver des cristaux qui soient typiques de cette espèce. Mais sans succés.

J’ai versé un autre photographie de semseyite dans COMMONS.

La photographie de la pièce du Musée de Bonn est difficile a prendre comme référence. La base est une sidérite sur laquelle il y a des cristaux de semseyite et de fizelyite j’ai annoté la photographie pour plus de compréhension. J’ai aussi rajouté sur cette photographie la localité car je la connais mais il manquera la dimension de la pièce qui doit normalement toujours être donné.

La photo que j’ai versé montre mieux les cristaux de semseytite sans aucune autre association possible en dehors du quartz qui est bien visible et annoté. Pour le moment la plus didactique est Semseyite2.JPG.

Bien amicalement. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

 Support Bien amicalement. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Château d'eau Laganne.JPG

Bonsoir Didier, oui, je suis d'accord qu'il faut encourager Laurent. En général, la composition et les couleurs de ses photos sont bonnes, il apprendra ce qu'il faut pour faire accepter ses images ici... comme nous l'avons fait et continuons de le faire :-).
Claude

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daum Nature Bougeoir.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 --George Chernilevsky 16:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Epidote Oisans.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. Another interesting mineral from you. --Iotatau 20:22, 21 February 2010 (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:
Semseyite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Strong support Criteria met, far better in scope --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:19, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2010 (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:
Bournonite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope, criteria met for a studio work --George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pyriteespagne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 06:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

scope toujours

Bonjour, Il y a dans VI des portraits qui ne font par référence à un scope mais directement à un article ; peut-on demander aux auteurs de mieux définir le scope ou y a-t-il une dérogation particulière ? Merci de tes lumières. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Bonjour, En fait, le cas est prévu, cf. Commons:Domaine des images de valeur#Liens dans le domaine :

"Liens dans le domaine

Vous êtes invités à ajouter des liens pertinents dans le domaine, de la manière suivante :

• Essayez de vous limiter à un lien par domaine, si possible. Seule la partie la plus spécifique du domaine devrait être liée ;
• S'il existe une galerie correspondante sur Commons, pointez vers elle ;
• Sinon, s'il existe un article sur la Wikipédia en anglais, pointez vers lui ;
• Sinon, abstenez-vous d'inclure un lien ;"
  

Donc en l'absence de galerie ou de catégorie Commons (au passage, ces dernières ne sont pas mentionnées dans la page en français alors qu'elles le sont en anglais, c'est un oubli à corriger), il est tout à fait possible de pointer vers un article (celui en anglais selon ces recommandations). Mais s'il existe une galerie ou une catégorie Commons, nous pouvons effectivement inciter les nominateurs à faire un lien vers celle-ci. Pour ma part, lorsque les deux existent, je trouve la catégorie préférable à la galerie qui, en général, n'est pas à jour et qui présente rarement les meilleures images de la catégorie. Amicalement, --Myrabella (talk) 13:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Merci voila un point d'éclairci; bien amicalement--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2010 (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:
Red beryl.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:31, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cookeite.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 --George Chernilevsky 18:04, 28 February 2010 (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:
Bixbyite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria met for studio photo. Good nomination --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 09:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

MVR

Bonjour Didier, Me permettras-tu une remarque sur tes interventions sur la MVR (Most valued review) relative à Qaqortoq ? Ce n'est pas un "set" mais une "évaluation d'images en compétition". Des images concurrentes sont présentées, et il est demandé de désigner la plus valable d'entre elles. Or tu soutiens chacune des deux... ce qui est un peu curieux ! (et ce qui en l'état se traduirait par un match nul ; aucune des images ne l'emporterait et n'aurait le lable VI). Amitiés, --Myrabella (talk) 11:23, 6 March 2010 (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:
Tennantite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Merci, Docteur Lézard-aux-vieilles-dents !!

Bonjour, de retour de vacances, je vois un message de vous, et aussi qu'une de mes photos a été promue ! Je suis plein de fierté et de reconnaissance, étant tout à fait nouveau sur le site, et parfaitement "amateur" (ou dilettante, ou béotien) en fait de photographie. Merci aussi pour les remarques, je vais tenter désormais de géocoder (et avant, de comprendre comment on fait...), et d'angliciser, même si je suis un francophone militant et que ça m'agace d'avoir à passer sous fourches caudines des Anglo-saxons !! Félicitations aussi pour vos images, si fréquemment promues. ça relativise ma performance !! --Jebulon (talk) 17:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Barbadine ?

Bonjour et encore merci. Les jugements et commentaires d'un maître me font honneur ! Je croyais qu'il fallait plutôt essayer de faire entrer les photos dans des catégories en anglais ? Etant voisin du JdP, j'y vais souvent, j'ai des dizaines de fichiers de photos de roses, par exemple, mais je ne sais pas si ça a vraiment de l'intérêt d'en rajouter ici. Pour les noms latins, jusqu'à présent je ne prenais de photos que pour moi, pas pour Commons. Je n'éprouvais donc pas le besoin de "classer" ou de nommer. Mais ça va changer ! Pouvez-vous aussi commenter mon dahlia ? Je n'ai toujours pas compris le géocodage, ça me parait trop compliqué. Quant aux images de valeur... Je n'ai pas osé jusqu'à présent... Je vais essayer. Je ne sais pas non plus comment insérer une photo dans Wikipédia. Je remarque aussi qu'il existe parfois des articles bien construits d'une part, et des catégories de médias correspondantes très riches dans Commons, mais parfois sans liens entre les deux (le petit bandeau avec le logo de wikimedia commons). C'est dommage et j'aimerais bien apprendre à faire ça. Il faut aussi que j'intègre mieux la syntaxe, notamment pour aller à la ligne ! Vos minéraux me fascinent et sont très réussis, très intéressants et plus accessibles qu'au JdP, justement ! Bien cordialement à vous --Jebulon (talk) 18:07, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Images de valeur

Bon, je renonce à proposer ma passiflore. Mon anglais n'est pas assez bon pour la deuxième page, je ne comprends rien ! Pourquoi diable la procédure n'est-t-elle pas la même que pour les "images de qualité" ? Croyez-vous pouvoir m'aider ? --Jebulon (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2010 (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:
Ferro-axinite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:57, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scolécite.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, beautiful. -- Avenue 16:50, 7 March 2010 (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:
Piemontite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good nomination, criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:34, 11 March 2010 (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:
Anatase.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria met, best in scope --George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

scope ?

Bonsoir sauropode, (oui, je sais, la catégorisation est trop large, mais c'est plus court à écrire !) V'la t'y pas que George d'Ukraine me demande un truc à propos du scope de ma passiflore candidate pour VI. Grâce à Myrabella, j'ai saisi la demande, mais je ne sais pas comment la satisfaire. Je leur ai demandé à tous deux de m'aider, peux-tu aussi m'apporter tes lumières ? (le son dans la vraie vie, la lumière dans Commons, tu es un homme complet !)... Passiflora, ça ferait un joli nom de personnage d'opéra italien, non ? Bien cordialement --Jebulon (talk) 01:11, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

C'est fait pour les deux demandes... tu récolte beaucoup ces temps-ci, félicitations, voilà une entrée remarquée... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Il faut dire aussi que j'importe beaucoup, mais c'est vrai, je suis flatté... Et pourtant je trouve mes photos bien médiocres par rapport à celles des autres, d'autant qu'elles ont toutes été prises avant que je connaisse Commons et ses règles sévères, et même si J'aimerais bien que ma "passiflora" soit élue VI. Quant à la fenêtre de la mosquée, je ne sais pas. La flemme, probablement. Et je l'aime bien comme ça, aussi. Et puis ça fait beaucoup à apprendre en peu de temps, je n'ai même pas encore bien assimilé la simple syntaxe, alors installer un logiciel pour redresser des perspectives...En tous cas, comme tu peux le voir, je suis bien mordu et passionné ! Grâce à toi, notamment --Jebulon (talk) 15:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Du coup, j'ai mis mon drapeau du Luxembourg, on verra bien !--Jebulon (talk) 18:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

illustration

Bonjour, Didier!

En Ukraine établir le monument de la brigade légère (les ennemis anciens): File:British_1854-1856_2009_G1.jpg.

Ajoutez s'il vous plaît cette illustration aux articles :

• fr:Charge de la brigade légère
• fr:Bataille de Balaklava

Bien amicalement --George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

C’est fait Georges, Avec plaisir, je suis à ta disposition. Amicalement--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Covellite-USA.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 and otherwise also good. --Cayambe 20:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Photo éducation aux Indes

Répondu ! --Myrabella (talk) 15:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Images, vignettes

Bonjour Archaeo. C'est vrai que je m'amuse beaucoup à proposer des images. je suis un "amateur", et je n'ai pas de domaine de prédilection. Je m'efforce d'aimer ce qui est beau. Donc j'écume mes anciennes photos pour voir s'il ne s'en trouverait pas qui pourraient plaire, ou qui seraient originales, ou qui pourraient servir (après tout, c'est ça le but). Merci pour les vignettes, je voulais justement te demander comment faire (l'intitulé de ma photo était d'ailleurs un "appel du pied" à ce sujet). J'ai vu que mon Panthéon penche (il penche un peu dans la réalité), mais je ne sais pas comment redresser, je n'ai jamais essayé, ça viendra, j'ai vu qu'il y avait un logiciel. Très sympa, tout ça. J'ai demandé des explications à ceux qui ont rejeté mes photos, tous m'ont répondu fort rapidement et fort aimablement, avec beaucoup de patience et de gentillesse. Leurs arguments sont toujours pertinents et convaincants jusqu'à présent. Tu auras peut-être vu que je me suis attelé aussi aux VI. George Chernilevski a soutenu ma fleur. Et toi ? Vas-tu t'atteler au classement des photos de minéralogie ? Merci de ton message.--Jebulon (talk) 16:25, 14 March 2010 (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:
Haüyne.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Criteria met for a studio photo --George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:20, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Could you please sign? :-) --Myrabella (talk) 23:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

• Confirm, it is my support vote --George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! TopazeRose2.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. It is hard object for good result --George Chernilevsky 12:43, 14 March 2010 (UTC)  Support Well done, great image. Thanks for the reshoot. --99of9 12:42, 15 March 2010 (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:
Powellite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good, criteria met for a studio work --George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 09:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

News ?

Hello Archaeodontosaurus. No news, good news ? J'espère ! Voici un mois désormais que j'ai intégré le système, et je n'oublie pas le charmant accueil que tu m'as réservé à mon arrivée. J'ai beaucoup progressé depuis, au moins dans la compréhension du langage et de la syntaxe, j'arrive même désormais à mettre des liens vers des articles ou d'autres photos jusque dans les notes des images. Je m'amuse aussi beaucoup à correspondre avec le monde entier, un néo-zélandais, et maintenant un taïwanais critique. Très intéressant. C'est un peu grâce à toi, merci donc à nouveau. Il me reste à avoir à la fois un meilleur oeil, et surtout une meilleure technique, on va essayer, mais j'ai vraiment été beaucoup distingué, malgré ma médiocrité. Je suis un peu fâché avec les VI et les VIC, mais ça n'est pas grave, j'y reviendrai quand j'aurai mieux compris. Toujours de bravos pour toi et tes "pierres", c'est un enchantement quasi quotidien. Amicalement. --Jebulon (talk) 13:48, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

re. Merci de ta réponse. Plusieurs choses à te dire. La première et la plus importante, ce qui conditionne tout le reste : jusqu'à présent, je n'ai pas publié une seule photo prise dans l'idée de la verser dans "Commons". Je ne publie que des anciennes photos, prises avant que je ne découvre wikipedia et consorts autrement que comme utilisateur. Donc aucune n'est vraiment destinée à "Commons", ce qui fait qu'aucune n'a l'"oeil" attendu dans "Commons", sauf fortuitement. D'où aussi le fait que je publie beaucoup, car il s'agit d'anciens fichiers, de mon stock en quelque sorte. Pour comprendre mon état d'esprit, il faut comprendre ça. Peu à peu ça va changer, et mes prochaines photos, peut être, présenteront des cathédrales vues droite, de face, avec une perspective corrigée, alors que jusqu'à présent, plus la vue était "baroque" ou "originale", mieux j'aimais. J'ai discuté de ça avec l'aimable Myrabella, j'ai compris. Va voir sa page de discussion à ce sujet. J'ai en ce moment un débat avec elle sur ma "résistance" à la façon de fonctionner des VIC, et notamment sur l'agacement sans borne que suscitent en moi les débats byzantins (et à mon sens injustes, essentiellement quant à la clarté de la règle du jeu) sur les "scopes", "domaines", "catégories" et autres "topics", où l'on fait subir les derniers outrages aux diptères au détriment des nominateurs (et en les humiliant un peu au passage aussi). Bon, c'est une question de calage, Ce n'est pas grave, ça viendra. Mais j'ai été de tellement mauvaise humeur que j'ai retiré toutes mes candidatures, y compris celles en passe d'aboutir (ça aurait été incohérent sinon. Puisque je n'adhère pas au système, je m'en extrais). Si je suis le seul à avoir ainsi manifesté, je sais que je ne suis pas le seul à penser ainsi. C'est devenu tellement compliqué, qu'on voit vraiment beaucoup d'images aux catégories intouchables et in-retoquables parce que scientifiquement classées (Linné, Buffon...minéraux ) au détriment d'autres choses, toujours sujets à discussions sans fin. Ce qu'il y a de bien, c'est que tout m'intéresse, et que je ne m'arrête pas à une spécialité. ça fait peut-être amateur, mais ça me permet de corriger en ce moment un article de Wikipedia sur la République d'Autriche entre 1918 et l'Anschluss, suite à un livre que je suis en train de lire. Enfin, si je viens de retirer mes fleurs, ce n'est pas parce que, Ô scandale, aucune d'elle ne supporte d'insecte et que c'est la mode ici (ça, c'est typique de mon mauvais esprit), c'est tout simplement que, pour belles qu'elles soient, elles ne "meetent" pas les "criteria" (résolution trop basse, pas assez de pixels) Carschten a raison. C'est dommage, j'en ai un paquet, vu ma proximité avec la roseraie du Jardin des Plantes. On reverra ça en mai prochain, j'en referai de nouvelles. Voilà les infos. J'espère te retrouver bientôt. Si tu évalues une de mes photos, n'hésite pas à prendre le temps de m'en parler chez moi !--Jebulon (talk) 18:21, 21 March 2010 (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:
Adularia.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Criteria met for a studio photo, best in scope --George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:31, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:09, 21 March 2010 (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:
Legrandite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support good studio shot. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Promoted. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hippos

Bonjour Archaeodontosaurus, Je ne sais pas si tu t'y connais un brin en hippopotames ;-), mais puis-je te demander de jeter un coup d'oeil sur cette VIC ? Déjà pour l'ID (je suppose qu'il s'agit de l'espèce la plus commune d'hippo, qu'en penses-tu ?) et aussi peut-être pour savoir laquelle des deux images pourrait être VI. Je trouve en fait que l'image nominée est un peu plus illustrative que celle que j'ai trouvée car on y voit bien l'engagement des deux animaux, mais comme je ne m'y connais pas en bêbêtes petites ou grosses... --Myrabella (talk) 18:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Protocole

Bonjour Archaeodontosaurus,
Merci beaucoup de tes avis précieux. En ce qui concerne le protocole, c'est une magnifique nouvelle, et cela va être très bénéfique à Commons et aux Wikipediae. Je te souhaite donc un après-midi fructueux ! Amicalement, --Myrabella (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Bois de renne

Bonjour Archaeodontodaurus,
Magnifique ! Tes deux photos sont distinguées une heure à peine après que tu les aies proposées ! C'est la marque d'un Maître ! Au fait, question de base, mais je ne suis qu'un amateur : comme fait-on pour mettre sur la même image plusieurs vues d'un même objet ? Bon. Les détails de l'usure de l'outil sont fascinants, et tu as magnifiquement su les saisir. Je suppose que tout cela résulte de tes démarches évoquées ci-desus. C'est tant mieux, tout le monde en profite ! Merci.--Jebulon (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

• re-moi. Nous nous sommes permis, à plusieurs, de donner un nom plus anglais à tes descriptions. Manifestement, nos amis anglo-saxons ne comprenaient pas l'utilisation du mot "wood", -bois-, pour une corne de renne. Faux ami ! On a rectifié. Bien à toi , --Jebulon (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Tous mes voeux t'accompagnent, ArchaeodontoGastonPhoebus ! En tous cas ça commence bien ! ----Jebulon (talk) 11:26, 28 March 2010 (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:
Nickel-skutterudite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Rare photo. Criteria met for a studio photo --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:43, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 11:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

QI candidate

C'est encore moi. j'ai proposé deux vues en gros plan d'une médaille d'honneur de la police française (et revers), elles sont en "consensual review", mais ne suscitent aucun commentaire, ni pour ni contre. Comme c'est la première fois que je m'essaie à ce type de travail, j'aimerais bien une opinion éclairée, un soutien ou un rejet. Je me soumets à ton jugement. Pourrais-tu me donner ton avis de spécialiste stp ? Merci.--Jebulon (talk) 17:23, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Phoebus en Beta-Test

Bonjour Archaeodontosaurus, Quelle belles premières images ! Ce beta-test s'annonce bien. Me permettras-tu une petite question ? Les indications descriptives seront-elles un peu plus étoffées par la suite (par exemple type d'outil, voire lieu du gisement ?) Et j'imagine qu'il y aura aussi un gros travail de catégorisation à faire. Si tu as besoin, n'hésite pas à requérir de l'aide (Category:Magdalenian existe, c'est déjà ça :-). Il y a longtemps, j'ai eu la chance de visiter la grotte de Niaux, un souvenir inoubliable. Merci de nous faire partager ces trésors. Amicalement, --Myrabella (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Très bonne remarque, je n'ai mis qu'une légend minmiale, nous avons deux universitaires en préhistoire qui vont reprendre les légendes, ce sera plus simple pour eux de reprendre les photos déja sur Commons. La troisiéme étape sera la labelisation muséum. Nous avons la chance que l'un d'entre eux est... Wikipédien de haut niveau, ce qui devrait nous faciliter la tache. Pour l'outil en question il nous sert que de tes car son origine est perdu, les vestige d'étiquette mentionnent "ariège" il est probalblemet du Mas d'Azil ou de... Niaux.

Archiver les discussions

Puis que je t'ai au bou du fil : comment archiver les discutions? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour Didier, Pour ma part, j'archive à la main :

• La première fois, insérer le modèle Archive box en haut de la page de discussion courante. La syntaxe générale de ce modèle est : {{Archive box|[[/nom de l'archive]]}} ; on peut paramétrer la largeur.

Exemple :

Archives /Archives/Printemps 2010

{{Archive box|box-width=10em|[[/Archives/Printemps 2010]]}} donne la petite boîte d'archivage ci-contre.

• Cliquer sur le lien rouge : cela amène sur une sous-page utilisateur à créer, de type User talk:nom_utilisateur/nom_de_l'archive.
  

Dans l'exemple, si tu cliques sur le lien rouge de la boîte d'archive ci-contre, tu arrives sur une nouvelle page vierge User talk:Archaeodontosaurus/Archives/Printemps 2010

• En haut de cette nouvelle page, insérer le modèle {{talkarchive}} : il permet d'afficher un bandeau avertissant le lecteur qu'il s'agit d'une page d'archive à ne pas éditer.

• Copier-coller les discussions à archiver dans cette nouvelle page, la sauvegarder.

• Effacer les discussions à présent archivées de la page de discussion courante, la sauvegarder. Et voilà la manip !

Si ta page de discussion se remplit très vite et que tu dois la vider souvent, tu peux aussi en automatiser l'archivage, en utilisant le robot MiszaBot.
--Myrabella (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2010 (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:
Okenite.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Good studio photo. Criteria met --George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Myrabella (talk) 21:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Boisderenne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI and I think it's featured too --Carschten 17:05, 27 March 2010 (UTC)  Comment The image is wonderful, but the English description "Tool wooden reindeer" is a little too enigmatic. --Avenue 21:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC) explanation: It is a prehistorical (magdalenian) tool, made with a horn of a reindeer...English language is not easy for us, poor Frenchies, ----Jebulon 23:49, 27 March 2010 (UTC)  Comment I updated the English description for the image. --Loadmaster 01:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC) Much better. Thanks everyone.--Avenue 00:54, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Technique Photo

Bonjour Archaeodontosaurus ! Juste un petit mot pour te remercier de tes tuyaux sur la technique photo. Je ne sais pas si je vais acquérir les spots, mais j'ai déjà une petit rampe de LEDS qui pourrait faire l'affaire. Je m'attelle à des essais dès que possible, tu verras les résultats. Naturellement, si ça ne marche pas, je dirai que c'est de ta faute, comme convenu . Tant que j'y suis, je te signale que ton blason occitan des Comtes de Toulouse est mal placé sur ta page Utilisateur, on ne le voit pas bien, il chevauche d'autres trucs. Et merci d'avoir demandé à Myrabella comment faire pour archiver, j'allais lui poser la question ! Bien à toi ! (c'est quoi, ton prochain exploit photographique ? je guette tes productions avec toujours autant d'impatience !) ----Jebulon (talk) 14:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Boisrenne1.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 high QI, for me. The "reflect effect" is very nice. Very interesting. Maybe less useful than the other one, but wonderful image. Archaeo is back ! --Jebulon 17:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)  Info I updated English description for this image too...----Jebulon 16:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)