User talk:Gringer

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This user prefers to receive comments on his Wikipedia talk page.

Archives[edit]

hello — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.132.78.74 (talk) 02:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Gringer!
Tip: Add categories to your files
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 (talk) 05:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Tree of Life[edit]

Hi Gringer. I enjoyed zooming in on your tree of life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tree_of_life_with_genome_size.svg I already knew that we're closely related to the chimps, but it's new to me that we're just as closely related to the rat and that even rice is a fairly close relative. Maggy160 (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

For puting the Che signature into a SVG format. Now I am trying to figure out how to replace all the jpg formats, for yours. Maybe it would easier if you uploaded it as your own file and used my full description? I'm not concerned with being given credit for the image. Redthoreau (talk) 16:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can't replace a JPG file with an SVG, they're entirely different formats. I presume the requester at the graphics lab will deal with replacing the instances of the image. No doubt there's a bot available to do a blanket replacement if desired. Gringer (talk) 08:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trig functions[edit]

You might want to take a look at File talk:Trigonometric functions.svg concerning modifications you have made to this file. SpinningSpark 07:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. It looks like I've got a bit of work to do.... Gringer (talk) 04:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have left another comment on the page. I really don't think this is acceptable. SpinningSpark 19:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. I don't agree with your point of view in this particular case, but don't care enough about the image to proceed further in a litigious argument. Gringer (talk) 05:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of Burma 1948-1974.jpg[edit]

You did a great job on the new one, care to try your hand?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a potential copyright problem with the state seals of Burma. Please join the discussion at "Commons talk:Licensing#State seals of Burma". Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 18:50, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny fix on File:2010-2011_Arab_world_protests.svg[edit]

Hello Gringer, great work on the map of Arab (& wider) protests. There is a tiny discrepancy that makes the map look awkward, at the northern (disputed) border of Western Sahara. It looks like the border you drew was horizontal, but because you're not using a flat map projection, it needs to be slanted, with its left end moved more to the north. In other words, the right end of the border looks fine, but its left end looks too low, meeting the Atlantic Ocean somewhere south of El Aaiún, whereas it should be north of El Aaiún and closer to Tarfaya. I could try fixing the map myself but you probably have it open in an application so it'll be an easy change.

Just an observation, thank you for the map. — Miranche (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Gringer (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE: image[edit]

Indeed the image title is Arab world protests, but it is as of now being used to map out on the newly name-changed "MENA protests" article, for short, and should reflect that. Unless you want to change the file name. --Haha169 (talk) 21:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I already made a new file, linked to from that image page, File:2010-2011_Middle_East_and_North_Africa_protests.svg. Gringer (talk) 21:41, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what the use is of having two almost-duplicate images, but sure. --Haha169 (talk) 21:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That odd green-circle-island object next to Madagascar. Just curious, what is that? --Haha169 (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's Comoros -- a member of the Arab League... probably shouldn't be in this map though because it's not in MENA. Fixed. Gringer (talk) 22:20, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tux-shaded.svg[edit]

File:Tux-shaded.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

PL Przemek DYSKUSJA 06:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ring of Fire Map[edit]

Hi Gringer, Thank you for your Ring of fire map, by respect I want to use it in my non-fiction research book name: "Heaven Triangle" Please Contact me at SH_M_Z@YAHOO.COM if you need to. I appereciate. Shahrokh mohammadzadeh 2011-08-13

Hi Shahrokh,
You're very welcome to use the map. It's 'licenced' as PD, so you can do anything you want with it. Just bear in mind that while I made the base map as a derivative of one of my other maps, there have been a couple of other people who have annotated the map to actually be useful. Gringer (talk) 22:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Karplus.svg[edit]

Hi Gringer. Are you willing to create an alternative version with a uncertainty range (as shown in de.wikipedia)? --Leyo 12:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with using the German version? The only non-English in the diagram is 'Diederwinkel' (Dihedral angle), which is an addition of information beyond what I created (and could be easily be shifted to the image description without loss of usefulness). Gringer (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The version I was referring to was replaced four days ago. --Leyo 08:46, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token dccc3080d3b3f5fa9b1fb93f5bde54b9[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Gaza strip[edit]

Please take note of the following news article :

  • Gaza: A people under siege[1], Aljazeera.com, 2012

Cheer ! ;) Yug (talk) 15:18, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:North Africa (orthographic projection) 2.svg[edit]

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:North Africa (orthographic projection) 2.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 21:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, darkweasel94 20:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of Dutch East Indies.svg[edit]

File:Coat of arms of Dutch East Indies.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Lemmens, Tom (talk) 14:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to use figure in a book.[edit]

Dear Gringer,

I am working with Prof. Steven LaValle to help obtain permissions for borrowing figures or pictures in his upcoming book Virtual Reality, to be published by Cambridge University Press. The book is online here:

http://vr.cs.uiuc.edu/

We are hoping to include the picture of yours (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Linear_visible_spectrum.svg) in this book (Chapter 4, Figure 4.5). Could we please have your permission for this? Thank you.

Sincerely,

Adam Warkoczewski — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.11.41.147 (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. If you read the license attached to the picture, you should be able to see that you already have permission for that; the picture is a public domain image: "use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law". Gringer (talk) 21:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to use on t-shirt[edit]

Dear Gringer,

I want to make a Marines' t-shirt. Can I use this image on t-shirt? Thank you.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Globeanchor.svg — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.21.106.125 (talk) 10:35, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The image is in the public domain, so go ahead and do whatever you want with it. Gringer (talk) 22:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted map[edit]

Hello Gringer! I wanted to let you know that I reverted File:Guatemala (orthographic projection).svg to its original version, per the discussion at [2]. Although we don't know the actual boundary that Guatemala is claiming yet (they will be presenting their claim at the ICJ later this year), we definitely know that it isn't the George Price Highway. I'm not sure how this idea got started that the George Price Highway is the boundary, but there is absolutely no basis in any reliable source for this (and it doesn't even make sense since the George Price Highway didn't exist until relatively recently). It seems to have originated with this Commons map created in 2016. Unfortunately, there are now half a dozen maps on Commons that have copied this bogus boundary, and media sources in both Guatemala and Belize are now reusing these incorrect maps, potentially creating circular referencing. As you wrote back in 2018, "Dispute boundaries are very tricky, because there are political implications for getting them wrong". In this case we have gotten them wrong and are inadvertently creating political consequences in the real world. Anyway, I'm sure I don't need to convince you of the importance of this issue. I just wanted to make you aware of why I reverted your work, since I'm sure that's aggravating. Otherwise, I think all the work you do on Commons is really top notch, so thank you for all the time you put into it. Kaldari (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd prefer it if you could explain what it should be changed to, or edit the existing image, rather than reverting to a lower resolution version that has worse borders for a whole lot of other countries. Gringer (talk) 08:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are 2 likely possibilities for what Guatemala will officially claim:
Regardless, the case is being heard by the ICJ this year and there is very little chance that Guatemala will be awarded any actual land territory in Belize (according to the few legal scholars that have weighed in on the matter), so we'll most likely need a map without the claimed territory anyway. My suggestion would be to create a new projection map for Guatemala that just shows Guatemala and use that for now. Once we know what boundary Guatemala is actually claiming (which should happen by July I think), make another map with the claimed territory and switch to that. We just shouldn't be speculating in the meantime, as Wikipedia is widely viewed as an authoritative source (for better or worse). The truth is that no one actually knows what territory Guatemala claims as they have always been intentionally vague about it, either saying that they claim Belize outright (which would be legally far-fetched), or that they claim the territory south of the Sarstoon River (which is very vague since the Sarstoon only goes half-way into Belize). Kaldari (talk) 17:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean you don't even want Belize highlighted? Gringer (talk) 11:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's correct. Highlighting any particular part of Belize (or all of Belize) would be speculation on our part until Guatemala actually makes a specific claim (which should happen later this year). So far, all we have are vague statements made by Guatemalan politicians. Kaldari (talk) 04:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've updated the Guatemala map to remove mention of Belize, and created an alternate map which has both Belize and Guatemala labeled and coloured in a similar fashion (for the dispute article). Gringer (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:CGS-12066A.svg[edit]

File:CGS-12066A.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

DMacks (talk) 06:30, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Natural_Earth[edit]

Category discussion warning

Natural Earth has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Enyavar (talk) 17:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:US Democratic Party Logo.svg[edit]

File:US Democratic Party Logo.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Cloudsarepretty (talk) 10:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo of the Church of England.svg[edit]

File:Logo of the Church of England.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Malverna 00:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Linear visible spectrum.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
This is one of the better rendering of the visible spectrum. The author has taken care to preserve the color appearance using the Jch model. --Artoria2e5 05:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Good quality. --Thi 18:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gringer&oldid=846356061"