User talk:Eusebius/Archives/Promotions/February 2009

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

review

•  Info Picture by User:Mountain. --Eusebius (talk) 11:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose To strong noise reduction. (First version was better at this point) --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

   Comment I think it is totally beyond the quality requirements for a VI (= picture from a cell phone). It is relevant only if you say that because of that, another picture is better suited. Maybe Lycaon and you (and any other interested reviewer) can agree on which version of this picture is the best one? --Eusebius (talk) 13:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

   Comment I like the middle version [1] of this picture. --Berthold Werner (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment I prefer this version as the lighting is much better. However, as I slightly edited this version, it wouldn't be proper for me to vote for it. Lycaon (talk) 01:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

   Comment If you want to vote, I'm pretty sure you can: "Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it)" (quoted from right below) --Eusebius (talk) 07:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Support in that case ;-). Lycaon (talk) 07:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Support After spending again some minutes in comparing the versions of this picture, I will support know. --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Erechtheum1.JPG: -1
3. Erchtheum from western-north.jpg: +2 <--
=>
File:Erechtheum1.JPG: Declined.
File:Erchtheum from western-north.jpg: Promoted. <--

--Eusebius (talk) 11:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Patras cathedral - interior.jpg

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

review

 Support There is a picture of Mary that is obsucred by the candelabrum, but it seems you cannot make a photograph wich shows the nave and the picture. Therefore support from me. --Berthold Werner (talk) 15:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 11:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenoble - musée de l'ancien évêché - Humbert Ier.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 --Dmottl 22:45, 6 February 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:
Helix pomatia (Burgundy snail).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Damn! Can't vote for mine, but this one ticks the relevant boxes. I would still love to know where it was found though... Lycaon (talk) 23:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

  The author could probably add some info about it, but somebody has to ask it in German. --Eusebius (talk) 06:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Helix pomatia (Dourbes).jpg: 0
3. Grapevinesnail 01.jpg: +1  <--
=>
File:Helix pomatia (Dourbes).jpg: Declined.
File:Grapevinesnail 01.jpg: Promoted. <--

--Eusebius (talk) 21:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenoble - plaque de la route Napoléon.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 Exact depth of field -- a plaque could not be photographed more perfectly than this. -- carol 05:23, 7 February 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:
Humbert I of Viennois.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support No better found ;-) Added at de:Humbert I. (Viennois)--Berthold Werner (talk) 13:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 11:36, 8 February 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:
Scott McCloud.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Easily the best image we have of him. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Previous reviews

•  Neutral Not enough reasons to oppose, but the other image shows him in his natural environment. Maybe I think to much like an ecologist ;-). Lycaon (talk) 10:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chartres - cathédrale - sculptures - crop2.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; meets the criteria. --High Contrast 23:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! La foire de Beaucroissant.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}}}

--Eusebius (talk) 12:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chartres - cathédrale - ND de la belle verrière.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 --Lucarelli 23:26, 22 February 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:
Monoski.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Seems to be a rare object. --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

  Appreciated only by connoisseurs ;-) --Eusebius (talk) 12:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 13:01, 20 February 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:
Saint Rogatien.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info Article in French about Donatien and Rogatien, the enfants nantais. --Eusebius (talk) 22:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria check out. Could do with yet a bit more contrast though. Lycaon (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Same remark, feel free to improve (anyone). --Eusebius (talk) 17:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 07:11, 21 February 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:
Saint Donatien de Nantes.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Info Article in French about Donatien and Rogatien, the enfants nantais. I used "de Nantes" in the scope because it is the form of the French article's title and because there is another Saint Donatien, but they're usually simply known are Donatien et Rogatien or Saint Donatien et Saint Rogatien. --Eusebius (talk) 22:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria check out. Could do with yet a bit more contrast though. Lycaon (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

  My monitor (or my eye?) is probably not properly set. Feel free to upload an improved version, I promise I would not complain on COM:AN/U for that :-) --Eusebius (talk) 17:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 07:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenoble - Rue de Bonne.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 --Twdragon 19:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenoble - SATOR AREPO TENET OPERA ROTAS.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 Attractive and well formed image - Peripitus 11:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)