User talk:Steindy/Archiv 1

Meine archivierten Diskussionen.

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, Steindy!

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 02:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 6 korrigiert.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 8.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 1.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 3.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 2.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 5.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 4.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 7.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
Image:Österreich-Rundfahrt 2009, Profil Etappe 6.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

File:Pavel Košťál (Fußballspieler) - Hertha BSC Berlin (1).jpg[edit]

Nachdem du den Verein geändert hast sehe ich erst, dass der völlig verunglückt ist, ich dachte es wäre nur der Namen. Soll ich das Bild löschen und du lädst es unter richtigem Namen nochmal hoch? --Martin H. (talk) 01:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Martin! Ja bitte und vielen Dank für Deine Aufmerksamkeit! – L.G. Steindy (talk) 02:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, gelöscht. Bitte unter neuem Namen hochladen und in de:Pavel Košťál wieder einfügen. Kann sein, dass ein Bot in deiner Benutzergallerie auf wp rumfuscht (nachdem ich das auch schon getan hatte nach der ersten Umbennenung). --Martin H. (talk) 03:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thomas Prammer - Fußballschiedsrichter.jpg[edit]

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

If you created this 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 ∙ +/−

Ich habe dein speedy in eine rfd umgewandelt, weil es kein Duplikat und auch nicht sooo schlecht ist, dass es wirklich ein speedy-Grund wäre. --Túrelio (talk) 13:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inter[edit]

Hi, thanks for your photos about Inter Milan's players. Can enter the picture of Dejan Stankovic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ciuccino (talk • contribs) 17:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can add all photos you linke ;-) – Regards Steindy (talk) 20:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard Wöss, TUSEM Essen - Handball Austria (1).jpg[edit]

Hallo Steindy,
du weisst, dass man Dateien auch umbenennen kann? Wie heisst der Spieler denn nun wirklich? --Túrelio (talk) 19:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Túrelio, danke für Deine Nachricht. Ja, ich weiß, dass Admins ein Bild verschieben können, doch ist es meist schwierig einen Admin zu finden, den man ansprechen kann. Die Verschiebemöglichkeit wäre für andere Benutzer, wie mich, auch von Nutzen. Vielleicht muss ich mal als Admin kandidieren ;-) Es ist ein Bild von Mare Hojc, von dem ich bereits ein Porträt unter File:Mare Hojc, HBW Balingen-Weilstetten - Handball Austria (1).jpg hochgeladen habe. Wenn Du so nett bist, dann schiebe das Bild nach "Mare Hojc, HBW Balingen-Weilstetten - Handball Austria (3).jpg". – Vielen Dank und liebe Grüße Steindy (talk) 10:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Habs verschoben, allerdings war (3) schon belegt, als File:Mare Hojc, HBW Balingen-Weilstetten - Handball Austria (4).jpg. Erfolgreiches 2010 ansonsten, freue mich auf viele schöne Bilder und ausserdem freue ich mich, dass die Handball EM bei dir stattfindet ;) --Martin H. (talk) 01:57, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank Martin! Da ich die EM bis zum Finale begleiten werde, denke ich, dass ich noch einige schöne Handballbilder beisteuern kann. Auch Dir ein erfolgreiches 2010. – L.G. Steindy (talk) 02:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tolle Arbeit und Glückwunsch zum Hauptseitenbild in de.wp, leider nicht auf fr:Wikipédia:Accueil principal wo es noch eher zu erwarten war. Kann es sein, dass ein Tool wie Commons:Hilfsprogramme/Commonist deine Upload-Arbeit beschleunigen würde? Commonist erfordert nur Java, dort verlinkt. Du kannst für Bilder individuelle Beschreibungen eingeben (Hinweis: copy&paste funktioniert in dem Tool nur mit Strg+V, nicht mit Strg+Einfg) sowie Kategorien (Kategorie1|Kategorie2|...) und alle anderen gemeinsamen Informationen (leider auch das Datum) auf einen Wurf. Ich möchte behaupten, dass du, wenn du das Tool für den Upload benutzt und anschließend die Bildbeschreibung nacharbeitest in dem du einen Teil der Beschreibung per c&p ersetzt wie unten dargestellt und wie ich es z.B. für alle Bilder in Category:Wirtschafts-Atlas der deutschen Kolonien gemacht habe oder wie es hier ein anderer Benutzer dieses Tools gemacht hat, schneller bist. Editierbeispiel:

Vorher	Nachher
`[...] \|Author=[[User:Steindy\|Steindy]] \|Permission=Own work, copyleft: Multi-license with GFDL and Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-3.0 and older versions \|other_versions= }} {{self\|cc-by-sa-3.0\|GFDL}} [...]`	`[...] \|Author=[[User:Steindy\|Steindy]] \|Permission={{User:Steindy/Credits}} \|other_versions= }} {{self\|GFDL\|cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}} [...]`

Noch schneller kann ich dir den Commonist upload anpassen indem ich Autowikibrowser verwende, die Ersetzung ist ja immer die gleiche, den Gefallen würde ich dir dann gerne tun. --Martin H. (talk) 16:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Martin, vielen Dank für Deine Nachricht und Dein Lob! Die französische Wikipedia ist mir eigentlich egal; dort wurde das Bild sogar von ganz oben nach unten verschoben und weitere Spielszenen wurden auch nicht verwendet. Lediglich die Schiedsrichter wurden übernommen. Obwohl ich es mit meinem SUL schon öfters machte, Bilder in anderssprachigen Ausgaben einzubauen, habe ich einfach im Moment nicht die Zeit dazu.

Deinen Hinweis werde ich selbstverständlich gerne annehmen, da ich noch hunderte Bilder (Handball und Fußball) hochzuladen habe. Ich werde versuchen, mir das noch heute abends anzusehen, da ich jetzt einmal etwas in meiner Sauna relaxen werde. Ich hoffe, dass ich mich als eher schlechter PC-Anwender dabei auskenne und keine Fehler mache. Wenn ich Fragen dazu habe, werde ich hoffentlich auf Dich zurückkommen dürfen? – Liebe Grüße Steindy (talk) 16:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probiers mal, empfiehlt sich besonders für Sammlungen gleichen Datums, also z.B. eine Foto-Session bei einem Spiel. Das Tool listed wird die hochgeladenen Bilder unter User:Steindy/gallery listen, einschließlich eventueller Fehler. Speicher die Bilder die du hochladen willst in einem separaten Ordner auf deinem Computer, du brauchst nichtmal die Dateinamen vorher zu ändern sondern kannst das im Tool in Vorbereitung des Uploads machen. Wenn bei der Verwendung was schief geht und du nicht weist wie du es reparieren kannst sag einfach bescheid. --Martin H. (talk) 17:14, 2 February 2010 (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, Steindy!

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.

CategorizationBot (talk) 18:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Erdfunkstelle Fuchsstadt, 18-Meter-Antenne (markiert).jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 18:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keine Einsortierung nötig, da das Bild nur zu Demozwecken bei der Kandidatur über exzellente Bilder diente. --Steindy (talk) 18:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Neudörfl - ehemaliges Esterhazysches Kastell (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Quality image for me.--JonnyBrazil 10:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Marz - Pfarrkirche (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Carschten 19:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2010–11 UEFA Europa League - SK Rapid Wien vs F.C. Porto (07).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 Tilted, but ok. --Mattbuck 21:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Christian Mendes - SC Austria Lustenau (08).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 Rather small, but ok. --Mattbuck 21:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Manfred Krassnitzer, Fußballschiedsrichter (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good enough. --Mattbuck 21:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Massimo Busacca, Referee, Switzerland (10).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 Small and a bit noisy, but ok. --Mattbuck 21:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Final of the 2011–12 Austrian Cup (41).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 exzellent! genau der richtige Moment :-) --Ralf Roletschek 19:33, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Final of the 2011–12 Austrian Cup (11).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. WOW! --Ralf Roletschek 19:33, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SV Mattersburg vs. FC Wacker Innsbruck 20130421 (17).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. --Ralf Roletschek 09:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SV Mattersburg vs. FC Wacker Innsbruck 20130421 (01).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wolfau - Volksschule (01).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SV Mattersburg vs SC Wiener Neustadt 20110716 (35).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, but why are you downsampling your photos, or is it such a tight crop? --Tuxyso 21:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Can-Am Spyder RSS (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Below 2MB. Other version possible? --Dirtsc 18:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I dont understand what you mean with the 2MB? Please take a look at teh size of the photo. --Steindy 16:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Dateigrösse 1,12 MB" lt. Eigenschaften auf Commons. Sollte aber min 2MB für QI sein. --Dirtsc 18:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any new booking conditions? I think you are confusing since MP (megapixel) with MB (megabytes)!? --Steindy 21:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are right! My fault, sorry! --Dirtsc 06:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nice that we have now discussed at length about the conditions, but nothing about the images. --Steindy 16:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This one looks good to me. --Dirtsc 20:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SV Mattersburg vs. SK Rapid Wien 2013018 (24).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 Although it is a sport photo this one has no noise :) QI for me. --Tuxyso 10:58, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Leo Windtner (ÖFB-Präsident) (06).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. --Poco a poco 09:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Leo Windtner (ÖFB-Präsident) (04).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. --Poco a poco 09:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Leo Windtner (ÖFB-Präsident) (03).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walter Schachner - Admira Wacker.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 OK --A.Savin 10:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Final of the 2011–12 Austrian Cup (127).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. --JLPC 17:34, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Walter Schachner - FC Admira Wacker Mödling (3).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 Bit noisy but still QI for me. --Kreuzschnabel 18:09, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Final of the 2011–12 Austrian Cup (126).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[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Raimund Hedl - SK Rapid Wien (2).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very nice portrait -- MJJR 21:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SV Mattersburg vs FK Dukla Banská Bystrica 2013-06-21 (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 16:06, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (095).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. --Ralf Roletschek 16:00, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ernst Scherr - SKNV St. Pölten (03).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SV Mattersburg vs FK Dukla Banská Bystrica 2013-06-21 (06).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. --Smial 10:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (099).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. --JLPC 17:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (097).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. --Ralf Roletschek 20:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (113).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. --Ralf Roletschek 20:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (116).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. --Ralf Roletschek 20:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (128).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. --Ralf Roletschek 20:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! U-19 EC-Qualifikation Austria vs. France 2013-06-10 (063).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. --Mattbuck 21:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sollenau vs. Ritzing 20140801 (060).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. --Poco a poco 17:56, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 1. SC Sollenau vs. FC Red Bull Salzburg 2014-07-12 (084).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. --MB-one 19:37, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

File:Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (10).jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (10).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 -- Spurzem 17:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (11).jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (11).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 -- Spurzem 17:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (12).jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (12).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 -- Spurzem 17:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (19).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Comment IMO it's overexposed in the upper part. --P e z i 21:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your constructive notice. I have now uploaded a new version of the photo. The problem is that the window is unevenly illuminated because of the background situation and is also located at a height of about 5 meters. A direct recording would be possible in the church with a very tall ladder. --Steindy 12:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC) Support Good quality. --Dnalor 01 17:25, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Forchtenstein - Pfarrkirche Maria Himmelfahrt (04).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 It lookks a little bit noisy, but IMO it's OK: QI. --XRay 16:56, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (008).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 --Cccefalon 19:05, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (012).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. --Hubertl 14:56, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (015).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. --Martin Falbisoner 21:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (033).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 Good quality --Halavar 22:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. But very tight crop. -- Spurzem 22:35, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (037).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. --Hubertl 18:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (041).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. --Hubertl 18:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (056).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (038).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (039).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (022).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (023).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (024).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (036).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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (081).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. --Hubertl 00:05, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (086).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 weak Support sufficient quality --Hubertl 00:05, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (047).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 Good quality. A little bit noisy but acceptable. --XRay 17:08, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (020).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 --Pleclown 11:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (048).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 Good quality. --XRay 12:14, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (059).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 IMO, you should chose one...--Jebulon 14:16, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And why should I chose one? This is a completely different photo and it's not about COM:VI. --Steindy 12:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is alright for me (this is a noticeably different photo), so I'm going to promote as there is no explicit oppose. --Ram-Man 04:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (080).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 --Christian Ferrer 05:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (078).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. --Mattbuck 21:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Austria vs. Sweden 20140908[edit]

Hi Steindy.

I saw that this category Category:Austria vs. Sweden 20140908, that was created by you, is empty. Are you going to fill it up with images or maybe I should put deletion request on it? Cheers. Dudek1337 (talk) 16:55, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dudek1337!

No, I was just not have time to sift through the images, edit and upload. I have also created not out of boredom the team rosters. Kind regards. --Steindy (talk) 17:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Udo Jürgens - Der Soloabend 2010 (02).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality, great moments. --Hubertl 01:06, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Udo Jürgens - Der Soloabend 2010 (05).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. --Hubertl 01:06, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Udo Jürgens - Der Soloabend 2010 (09).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Udo Jürgens - Der Soloabend 2010 (14).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[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (007).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. --Hubertl 01:10, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (015).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. --Hubertl 01:10, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (010).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. --Poco a poco 20:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (016).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. --Hubertl 20:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Udo Jürgens - Der Soloabend 2010 (13).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. --Hubertl 20:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (013).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 All white sky, but the main subject is crystal clear and the white sky contributes by providing contrast to the wires. --Ram-Man 03:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (018).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. --Poco a poco 07:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (003).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. --Hubertl 01:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (008).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. --Hubertl 01:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (020).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. --Hubertl 10:38, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (025).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. I understand, but in this case it was mainly the lost perspective. You should try my highpod, fantastic idea inbetween railwayareas! ;-) --Hubertl 13:48, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (006).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 Perspective issues --Christian Ferrer 07:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Corrected. --Steindy 01:24, 30 December 2014 (UTC) Support --Christian Ferrer 06:22, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (033).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. --Hubertl 01:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (034).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. --Hubertl 01:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (029).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 --Christian Ferrer 20:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (030).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. --Poco a poco 08:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (024).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. --Ralf Roletschek 15:51, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (028).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. --Ralf Roletschek 15:51, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (162).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. --Hubertl 14:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (037).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 Rich in detail, superb quality, precious photo-optical document. --Johann Jaritz 04:23, 02 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (039).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 Rich in detail, superb quality, precious photo-optical document. --Johann Jaritz 04:24, 02 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (040).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 Rich in detail, superb quality, precious photo-optical document. --Johann Jaritz 04:25, 02 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (038).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very good quality, precious photo-optical document. --Johann Jaritz 04:26, 02 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (043).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. --Hubertl 00:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (035).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very good quality for me. --Dnalor 01 10:37, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (036).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Very good quality. --Johann Jaritz 07:00, 01 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (019).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 composition, perfect quality. --Johann Jaritz 13:53, 01 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (047).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 Difficult lighting conditions, well managed. --Johann Jaritz 04:40, 03 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (048).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 Harsh contrasts, well bridged. Very sharp and good quality. Everything perfect. --Johann Jaritz 04:46, 03 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (041).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 Stunning details, good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:23, 03 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (045).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. --Johann Jaritz 04:17, 03 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (049).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:54, 04 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (053).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. --Hubertl 11:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (054).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. --Hubertl 09:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (061).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:20, 06 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (062).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. --Hubertl 00:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (063).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:16, 06 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (060).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. --Hubertl 00:13, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (064).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 quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:17, 06 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (055).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:25, 06 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (056).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:24, 06 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (058).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:23, 06 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (059).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. --Hubertl 19:33, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (067).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:48, 07 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (069).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:50, 07 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (057).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 -- Spurzem 13:30, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (073).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 Fine details, good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:44, 08 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (070).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. --Hubertl 16:25, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pitten - Firework (01).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 08:56, 07 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (074).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. --Hubertl 08:37, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (075).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. --Hubertl 08:37, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (084).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 Perfect composition, excellent quality, moody clouds, swell colour rendition. --Johann Jaritz 04:40, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (085).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (079).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 for me. --Dnalor 01 09:59, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (080).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 Excellent document, very sharp. --Johann Jaritz 05:00, 09 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (082).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 for me. --Dnalor 01 09:59, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (072).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 12:12, 09 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (066).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 12:14, 09 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (086).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 Main subject is okay, though right side is just acceptable. --DXR 08:42, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (092).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (096).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 Superb quality in all ways. --Johann Jaritz 03:30, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (101).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 Smart image, good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:28, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (089).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 Appealing quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:22, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (094).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 Distinct quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (105).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 Huge crane, excellent quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:54, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (106).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 Huge crane, excellent quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (103).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. --Hubertl 04:31, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (104).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 Impressive concrete blocks, very sharp image. --Johann Jaritz 04:00, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (095).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. --Hubertl 09:50, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (097).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 -- Spurzem 11:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (090).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 07:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (091).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 Good quality. --Dnalor 01 09:50, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (093).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 07:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (099).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (111).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 Men at work. –Be..anyone 04:05, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (112).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 Nice detail. --Johann Jaritz 03:30, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (107).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. --DXR 11:54, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (110).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:43, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (116).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:46, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (114).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 11:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (098).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 --Christian Ferrer 06:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (088).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 OK now. --Johann Jaritz 11:09, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (081).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 quality. --Johann Jaritz 11:03, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (083).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[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (133).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 QI for me. --Johann Jaritz 03:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (138).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support The Prodigy („I am the firestarter“) at work. --Johann Jaritz 03:43, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (128).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. --Hubertl 03:41, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (129).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. --Hubertl 03:41, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (125).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 after removing overexposed parts --Hubertl 10:14, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (123).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 --Christian Ferrer 06:31, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (150).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:35, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (151).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:36, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (126).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 Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 05:34, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (137).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. --Dnalor 01 11:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (139).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. --Dnalor 01 11:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your behaviour at QI[edit]

I do not have anything against you or your photos, I apply the same standards to everything I review. I am fully aware that railway catenaries are composed primarily of copper. I'm also aware of the difference between a reddish hue to a wire and purple/green chromatic aberration, as can be seen in many of your photos. Many other editors have also picked up on this, including Halavar and Christian Ferrer. These issues can be corrected fairly easily, but an image where CA is noticable should not be awarded QI until it has been fixed. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattbuck: If you do not mind my photos, then let my photos kindly at rest and save yourself your comments. You have to do with your photos enough. I'm not curious about this. Unlike you, I have given you enough Pro. But you are only looking for errors and alleged errors, even where none exist. A pro I have never gotten from you. Such behavior is unacceptable and uncooperative. And I'm not even curious about your comments on my disc. As admin, you should know exactly how to behave. So you only sweep before your own door and do not bother me further!

I shall therefore consider me if I think at QI would continue to provide "shitty" pixel garbage for discussion, or will only occur more than critics. For the moment, and my fancy in any case passed to it. Regards --Steindy (talk) 01:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have at no point called your images "shitty" or "garbage", in fact I have been perfectly pleasant in my reviews of your images, which contrasts with your behaviour towards me and towards other users who have taken the time to review your images.

You say that if I do not like your photos, I should not review them. That is not how QI works. We review images and, judging on the technical merits, promote or decline. Are you suggesting that no images should be declined at QI? I have promoted images I find incredibly boring and declined images that I absolutely adored - whether or not I "like" an image does not change its technical merit. I find it unlikely you have never got a promotion from me, but I honestly wouldn't know as I do not usually check names when reviewing. I should point out that when I was checking your nominations the other day, when this fuss started, I did check all of them, and there were quite a few I left alone which were at Promotion status, because I believed they were QI. Had I been the first person to look at them I would have promoted them myself. You say I look only for errors - that is more or less true: I start with the assumption that a photo will pass QI, then see if there are any reasons it shouldn't. Judging on technical merit alone lends itself to such a method. I further try and avoid declining an image where I think errors are fixable. The only reason I made the majority of my opposes was because the image was at promotion status when, to me, it needed some editing to become QI. I do not doubt that you are capable of taking QIs, and frankly most of the ones I opposed could be made into QIs were you just to fix the chromatic aberration. The aberration is not a fault of your photographic skill, merely a byproduct of refraction, and can be fixed without too much difficulty using standard image editing software.

I would request you reevaluate your attitude towards QI and towards the contributions of others. I have nothing against you, nor I suspect do Christian Ferrer, Smial, Kreuzschnabel, or anyone else who commented on your images. We have expressed honest opinions about your photographs, and told you how you can fix them. In return you have implied we are imbeciles, and now claim that we have a vendetta against you. Commons is not a battleground, and QIC is not a race to get as many images promoted as possible. Take the comments others provide and use them to take better pictures in future. I know that I have learnt a lot about photography and editing from my time at QIC, and Diego even dedicated a Wikimania talk to how much he's learned over the years. We all want to see better photos, out of pride and out of a wish to improve the quality of service Commons provides. Don't get mad, get better. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So it is with QI about who has the better picture editing program or better can handle it? Said in confidence, I do not have Photoshop or similar program. I do not have anything to reduce the image noise and I will have no such program and I deal with it. To me it is enough to make a photo the portion you want to adjust the color saturation and if necessary lighten or darken it a bit. This is nothing more than what I have done for 25 years in the darkroom. I am already contrary to correct for QI converging lines, because it does not correspond to the natural eye. I retouch a photo, and certainly not for Wikipedia or Commons because fakes are not encyclopedic. Photos are under the motto "What you see is what you get!"

I photograph for more than 40 years, of which almost 30 years for newspapers, magazines and books and have also successfully participated in photo contests, but something like commons was to me so far unknown. I now know how QI and one or the other user is to assess here. Is hard to understand, therefore, that my photos are thousands of times involved in more than 100 projects from Wikipedia. Incomprehensible at such shitty pixel garbage.

Therefore, I will not bother QI with my photos and occur only as a critic in appearance. In this case I reserve which photos I rate and exactly how I look at one thing or another photo because there are few perfect photos; certainly not on QI. --Steindy (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You do seem to be a good photographer - the photos you have nominated have been quite impressive for someone who doesn't use photoshop. But we must move with the times. Chromatic aberration may be unavoidable when taking a photo, but it is now very fixable. You don't need to use Adobe Photoshop, there are free alternatives out there (magazine cover CDs used to give them away, perhaps they still do). Just as taking a photo on film was only the first step to producing a photo, so it is on digital - photoshop is the new darkroom. I'm sure that if you could have done when you had a darkroom you would have enhanced the sharpness, reduced noise - what photographer wouldn't want better photos - that technology now exists. Therefore yes, it is expected that a quality image will be photoshopped in some manner. Photoshop cannot make a bad photo into a good one, but it can fix those niggling little limitations of SLR photography. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not own or use Photoshop or Lightroom, most can be done in my Raw developing software, nearly everything else I do with irfanview and ShiftN. Only dust spot removal etc. is done with the GIMP. All freeware, but, ok, not all-in-one-solutions. -- Smial (talk) 13:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment +1 with mattbuck. Steindy, neither you nor me, we have the authority to say whether the images of some authors are to be avoided or not. I'm also a bit frustrated to see my photos of insects in CR and not promoted however it is the rules of the game and I will not assault you or nobody else for to have opposed my nominations. That said, that does not prevent me to say my point of view and to defend my images if I deemed necessary, remaining correct and speaking only of technical criteria. We have the right to chose the images that we rewiew, I use this right when I want and I see that you too :), no problems, more there are rigorous rewiwers better it is for the QIC page level. Just remaining correct and be polite, it's all. -- ChristianFerrer 06:17, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (161).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. --Dnalor 01 08:05, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (164).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. --Johann Jaritz 03:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (159).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. --Dnalor 01 18:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (153).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. --Johann Jaritz 13:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Over and out![edit]

Ich habe die Schnauze voll, dass das Mobbing der de-WP auch vor commons nicht Halt macht! --Steindy (talk) 21:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FP Promotion[edit]

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Ferenc Ilyes (HUN), Artur Siodmiak (POL).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ferenc Ilyes (HUN), Artur Siodmiak (POL).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ferenc Ilyes (HUN), Artur Siodmiak (POL).jpg Beeindruckendes Bild[edit]

Bild des Tages am 22.01.2011. Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 06:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! – Kindly regards Steindy (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Der...[edit]

...Steindy macht sehr gute Fotos! Danke für deine Beiträge. Ich hoffe, viel Bildmaterial wird weiterhin folgen! Viele Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo High Contrast, vielen Dank für Dein Lob! Sowas freut immer wieder. Selbstverständlich werden noch viele Bilder (nicht nur vom Länderspiel A:D) nachfolgen. Von beiden Mannschaften kommen jedenfalls auch noch einige Einzelaufnahmen der Spieler. So um die 50 bis 60 Bilder sollten es schon werden. Schade, dass die Bildbeschreibungen so aufwändig sind und dass der Commonist bei mir nicht funktioniert. Wenn Dir ein Bild besonders gut gefällt, kannst Du es auch vorschlagen... – Freundliche Grüße aus Österreich Steindy (talk) 19:43, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalmannschaft[edit]

Wow, die Bilder vom Spiel Österreich-Deutschland sind mal ein echtes Schmankerl, freut mich, dass du da dabei sein konntest. --Martin H. (talk) 11:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Martin! Ich bin mittlerweile etabliert genug, um beim Fußball überall in Österreich dabei sein zu können. Ich habe ja auch eine Generalakkreditierung für die österreichische Bundesliga.

Es freut mich, dass Dir die Bilder gefallen. Ehrlich gesagt, bin ich bei einigen Bildern (Jogi Löw, Oliver Bierhoff, ...) selbst stolz auf mich. Ich denke, dass sich einige für eine Auszeichnung als Qualitätsbild oder gar exzellentes Bild eignen würden. Es kommt auch noch einiges an Bildern (Einzelaufnahmen der restlichen Spieler) nach.

Wie es weitergeht, kann ich aber im Moment noch nicht sagen, da meine Canon 50D, die ich fast aunahmslos für WP verwendet hatte, nach etwas mehr als zwei Jahren den Geist aufgegeben hat. Mal schauen, was das kostet und wie lange eine Reparatur dauert. Inzwischen habe ich leihweise die Nikon von Wikimedia Österreich (leider ohne Normalobjektiv), an die ich mich aber erst gewöhen muss. – L.G. Steindy (talk) 11:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, bei der Anzahl habe ich mich großartig verschätzt. Es werden insgesamt an die 200 Bilder (oder sogar etwas mehr) vom EM-Qualifikationsspiel werden. --Steindy (talk) 14:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fußball und Anderes...[edit]

Deine Kritik an meinen Fotos war noch sehr sanft, ich weiß, daß ich vom Spiel kein wirklich brauchbares Bild gemacht habe. Aber diese Kritik ist für mich konstruktiv und es stimmt, was du schreibst. Ich habe das geahnt und deshalb bei den Nationalhymmnen Bilder gemacht, die wenigstens unbebilderte Artikel bereichern können. Ich werde hier vor Ort zu unbedeutenden Spielen gehen und üben. Ich denke, das ist erstmal alles ne Frage der Übung. Meine Achtung vor deinen Bildern ist 100%ig Ernst gemeint, ich dachte, es wäre einfacher. Und ja, Technik ist nicht alles, das erleichtert die Arbeit nur. Aber Handwerk ist auch durch Technik nicht zu ersetzen. Ich bin übrigens kurz davor, bei WP auch vieles hinzuschmeißen. Aus anderen Gründen als du aber doch irgendwie vergleichbar. Es macht einfach keinen Spaß mehr an vielen Stellen.

Ich habe erstmal "alles" hochgeladen. Natürlich nicht alle Bilder, es sind nur etwa 10% übriggeblieben. Aber vielleicht braucht man ein Bild eines Spielers mal, eine Szene? Dann kann ich das rauskramen und bearbeiten, erstmal sieht jeder das Rohmaterial. Daß dabei auch viel Mist ist, weiß ich. Ich möchte aber mit diesen Bildern, die von WMAT bezahlt sind, keinen Schönheitswettbewerb gewinnen, ich möchte das investierte Spendengeld so einsetzen, daß möglichst viel dabei rauskommt. Deshalb bin ich auch einige Stunden durch die Stadt gefahren und habe alles geknipst, was irgendwie brauchbar sein könnte. --Ralf Roleček 19:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Ralf! Entschuldige, dass ich erst jetzt antworte. Ich nehme an, dass Du ja mitbekommen hast, was in de-WP wieder einmal läuft. Ich kann gar nicht mehr so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen könnte...

Was die Fußballfotos (und Sportfotos im allgemeinen) betrifft, musst Du Dein Licht nicht unter den Scheffel stellen. Es ist noch kein Meister vom Himmel gefallen. Ich kann gut nachfühlen, wie schwer es beim ersten Mal für Dich war. Wer es selbst noch nicht probiert hat, wird es auch niemals glauben, dass dies ein unheimlich schweres Unterfangen ist, das sehr viel Einfühlungsvermögen und Übung bedarf, weil es auf den einen und unwiederbringlichen Moment ankommt, edr ein Bild gut oder Schrott werden lässt. Durch das Mitverfolgen der schnell wechselnden Szenen mit der Kamera spielt zudem der Autofokus verrückt (ich kann ein Lied davon singen!). Weiters kommt noch dazu, dass die Bilder wegen der geringen Tiefenschärfe mit offener Blende am besten werden, was insbesondere bei großen Brennweiten zu minimalen Schärfenbereichen führt. Letztlich will niemand, der es noch nicht selbst probiert hat, begreifen, dass man selbst bei hellem Sonnenschein (ich hasse diesen übrigens wegen der harten Kontraste) mit ISO 100 keine guten Bilder machen kann, weil die Verschlusszeit zu lang ist. Wenns optimal ist, muss man mindestens auf ISO 400 gehen, im Regelfall aber mit ISO 800 oder 1600 arbeiten müssen. Die Pixelzähler kritisieren dann das Bildrauschen, das (sofern man nicht extreme Ausschnitte macht) jedoch weder beim Ausdrucken, noch im Druck stört. Der Bildredakteur wird sich auch nie am Bildrauschen orientieren, sondern ausschließlich daran, ob das Bild die entscheidende Szene zeigt. Übrigens, wie auch die Fußball-EM zeigt, hast Du selbst beim Mannschaftsfoto im Regelfall maximal ein bis zwei Sekunden Zeit, um abzudrücken, denn meist steht der erste Spieler schon wieder auf, ehe sich der letzte richtig positioniert hat.

Es mag jetzt nach Eigenlob klingen, aber ich sehe Woche für Woche in den Stadien, dass die Profis trotz wesentlich besserer Ausrüstung auch nur mit Wasser kochen und dass ich mich für meine Bilder gegenüber diesen nicht verstecken brauche. Insbesondere von Tageszeitungen werden oft Mini-Ausschnitte zum (Raster-)Druck verwendet, weil sie eben die entscheidende Szene zeigen. Zudem ist es so, dass ich mit einem Profi, der eine Ein-Mann-Agentur betreibt, besonders gut befreundet bin und diesem immer wieder mal Bilder von Spielen gebe, wo dieser nicht dabei war und diese werden von ohm mit Handkuss genommen. Auch wird von Verlagen, Zeitungsredaktionen, aber auch Internetseitenbetreibern und sogar vom ORF immer wieder gerne auf meine BIlder zugegriffen. Erst vor zwei Wochen ist wieder ein Buch mit zahlreichen WP-Bildern, aber auch nicht-WP-Bildern von mir erschienen. Ebenfalls vor zwei Wochen wurde ich, wie an den Bildern ersichtlich ist, vom ÖFB gebeten, die offiziellen Bilder von den Spielern der U-21-Nationalmannschaft zu machen. Das sind auch jene Erfolge, die für mich zählen und nicht, ob ein Bild von ahnungslosen Handyknipsern bei KEB ausgezeichnet wird oder nicht.:Falls Du weitere Fragen hast und es möchtst stehe ich Dir gerne mit Rat und Tat zur Seite. – Liebe Grüße Steindy (talk) 20:22, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your picture on the main page of en:wp[edit]

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that your picture of Vegar Eggen Hedenstad will be on the main page this afternoon, in the Did you know? section. Keep up the good work with photographing footballers. Cheers, 188.148.28.129 14:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the information! I'll try to keep on my work ;-) – Cheers Steindy (talk) 14:36, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permalink

Editor @ ar.wiki[edit]

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:29, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Avocato! Nice greetings Steindy (talk) 11:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hinweis[edit]

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Steindy --Didym (talk) 16:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Steindy, locker nehmen, das ist nur einer von der DE-WP, der ein Schäuferl nachlegen will, aber ein Russ hat es ihm eh gesagt wie man damit umgehen soll. -- Bwag (talk) 16:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hinweis II[edit]

Hallo Steindy, mit der Lizenz GFDL 1.2 soll es möglich sein, die Bilder aus der DE-WP fernzuhalten, vgl. [1]. Bwag (talk) 21:05, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Bwag! Sorry für die späte Antwort, aber die WP geht mir – zumindest im Moment – sonst wo vorbei. Ja, ich habe mir das MB angesehen und es scheint ein gangbarer Weg zu sein, daher herzlichen Dank für Deinen Hinweis! Den tollen Regelhubern der großartigen de-WP sei Dank ;-)

Ich werde das in den nächsten Tagen mit den Spielern der Fußballnationalmannschaften aus Bulgarien, Iran, Kanada und Montenegro (in Summe sicher 200–250, vielleicht auch 300 Bilder) gleich einmal ausprobieren. Danach kann ich immer noch sehen, wie das funktioniert und entscheiden, ob ich österreichische Fußballbilder hochlade. Ich bekomme ja, im Gegensatz zu anderen Benutzern aus A und D keine Förderung von WMAT... / L.G. Steindy (talk) 08:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Bwag: So, ich habe heute zahlreiche für die de-WP relevante Bilder unter der Lizenz GDFL 1.2 hochgeladen und werde in den nächstenn Tagen und Wochen zahlreiche weitere Bilder ebenfalls unter dieser Lizenz hochladen, da ich diese gerne den anderen Projekten außer der de-WP, aber auch Fremdnutzern zur Verfügung stelle. Ich möchte Dich ersuchen, solche Bilder, sofern sie in Artikeln der de-WP verwendet werden, unter Hinweis auf das de:Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/GFDL 1.2-only für Dateien zu entfernen. / Vielen Dank und l.G. Steindy (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, das wird schwierig *g*. Bwag (talk) 21:36, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gratulation zu dieser wirklich cleveren Lösung. Steindy, dir ist sicher bewusst dass deine "Fremdnutzer" bei einer Nutzung in einem Printmedium den vollen Lizenztext abdrucken müssen? Finde ich persönlich nämlich an den GFDL-Lizenzen nicht so praktisch. FDMS 4 00:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wooow @FDMS4: – Ich habe in Ihnen jetzt auch hier einen Aufpasser gefunden. Welche Ehre! Es ist immer schön, wenn Jungen, die noch nicht grün hinter den Ohren sind, auf einen Senior, der Ihr Großvater sein könnte, aufpassen...

Ganz abgesehen, dass es meine Angelegenheit ist, wie ich meine Bilder lizenziere, ist es auch meine Angelegenheit wie ich meine Bilder immer wieder weitergebe; nämlich auf Anfrage direkt und ohne jegliche Lizenzen und Abzocke. Urheber bleibe nämlich noch immer ich! Und mir liegt nichts ferner, als in Druckwerken durch meine Leistungen auch noch Werbung für WP zu betreiben. Compris? --Steindy (talk) 23:04, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Thank you for add pictures of Iranian player! Abiii13wp (talk) 18:22, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! It was a great pleasure and honor for me to photograph the Iranian players. Regards --Steindy (talk) 17:23, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are a poor poor boy[edit]

Español: Has sido tan mala persona conmigo que solamente puedo preguntar: ¿A ver como me jodes ahora que ya no tengo nada propuesto?

--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 20:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ursprüngliche Version[edit]

Español: Has sido tan mala persona conmigo que solamente puedo preguntar: ¿A ver como me jodes ahora que ya no tengo nada propuesto?

¿Se trata de que yo vaya a por ti? ¿Se trata de que tú vayas a por mí?

A mi no me importa aportar imágenes. A mi me puede importar señalar a un cabrón hijo de puta y gilipollas. Tu mismo.

Por lo que a mi respeta, no hay tregua. Sube muy buenas imágenes o las comentaré por no ser muy buenas. MISERABLE

--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 20:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

English: You have been so bad person to me that I can only ask: See how I fuck now that I no longer have anything proposed?

Is it that I go to for you? Is it that you go for me?

I would not mind contributing images. A can import my draw me a bastard son of a bitch and asshole. Yourself.

As my respects, no truce. Upload very good pictures or comment on not being very good. MISERABLE

Deutsch: Sie haben mir war es so schlechter Mensch, dass ich nur fragen: Sehen Sie, wie ich ficken jetzt, dass ich nichts mehr vorgeschlagen?

Ist es, dass ich gehen, um für Sie? Ist es, dass du für mich zu gehen?

Ich hätte nichts dagegen trägt Bilder. A kann meine Unentschieden mir eine uneheliche Sohn einer Hündin und Arschloch zu importieren. Yourself.

Wie meinen Respekt, ohne Waffenstillstand. Laden Sie sehr gute Bilder oder kommentieren nicht sehr gut. MISERABLE

Übersetzungen eingefügt von --Steindy (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

QI Image promotion[edit]

Español: Tus imágenes QI, por desgracia para Wikimedia son generalmente malas. Vulgarmente podríase decir que una mierda, pro no me atrevo a tanto

Beitrag von User:Lmbuga 2. Dezember 2014, 22:59:39 Uhr

English: Your images QI, unfortunately for Wikimedia are generally bad. Commonly an objector say shit, pro dare not both.

Deutsch: Ihre Bilder QI leider für Wikimedia sind in der Regel schlecht. Häufig ein Verweigerer sagen, Scheiße, pro wagen nicht beides

übersetzt von --Steindy (talk) 21:23, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Offener Brief an Herrn Savin[edit]

Werter Herr @A.Savin: !

Wie ich sehe, setzen Sie Ihr Verhalten, das Sie seinerzeit in der de-WP an den Tag gelegt haben, auf commons nahtlos fort. Mit dieser Sperre sind Sie diesmal zu weit gegangen. Aufgrund Ihrer Stellungnahmen auf . Es ist nachgerade erheiternd, dass positive Voten von Ihnen als „Intimidation/harassment“ gewertet werden. Auch Ihre weitere Sperrbegründungen „heavy abuse of QIC process“ und „edit warring“ ist völlig haltlos, da ich ausschließlich positive Stimmen abgegeben habe und von mir gegebene Kontra in Pro korrigiert habe. Auch die Rückziehung eigener Kandidaturen stellt diesen Tatbestand nicht dar.

Es steht Ihnen auch kein administratives Recht zu, Kandidaturen, die ich eingestellt und wieder zurückgezogen habe, wieder einzustellen, wie Sie es bei File:Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (075).jpg und File:Austria vs. Russia 20141115 (078).jpg gemacht haben. Sie haben damit Ihre administrativen Befugnisse klar überschritten. Da dies im Rahmen Ihrer administrativen Tätigkeit geschehen ist (= im Zusammenhang mit meiner Sperre) ist dies auch ein Missbrauch Ihrer erweiterten Rechte, die in COM:A#Community role klar geregelt sind.

Auch die Einseitigkeit Ihrer Entscheidung, mich zu sperren und den Provokateur Livioandronico2013, der das Hounding gegen mich begonnen und mit zahlreichen persönlichen Angriffen auf mich fortgesetzt hat, laufen zu lassen, stellt einen Missbrauch Ihrer erweiterten Rechte dar. Sie sind als Administrator ungeeignet, wenn Sie die Opfer sperren und die Täter laufen lassen. Sie sollten sich bei @Yann: ein Beispiel nehmen, wie man das Adminamt ausübt.

Ich werde nach Ablauf meiner Sperre wegen Ihrer Befangenheit, die ich durch Ihre e-Mails mit den Beleidigungen und Drohungen in e-Mails vom 20.09.20214 und vom 24.09.2014 belegen werde, und wegen des Missbrauchs Ihrer erweiterten Rechte ein de-Sysop beantragen. Wie gesagt habe ich seinerzeit einen Admin meines Vertrauens zur meiner Absicherung gegen Ihre zu erwartenden Übergriffe mit Ihren Schreiben befasst.

Ich schreibe Ihnen dies bewusst hier, damit die nötige Transparenz gewahrt ist und jeder Benutzer mitlesen kann.

Grußlos --Steindy (talk) 23:13, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ergänzt von --Steindy (talk) 23:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Du solltest dich nicht wundern, warum ich mich, was S1 betrifft, nicht einmische. Er hatte ehemals Hausverbot bei mir auf WP - seine Auftritte dort waren Legende, die dann in Folge zu seinem (erinnerlich erzwungenen) Rücktritt zuerst als Admin, dann zum Rückzug als WP-Autor führte. Das war eine der ganz wenigen Situationen bei Rücktritten von Admins, bei dem ich das wirklich ausdrücklich und nachhaltig begrüsst habe, weil tatsächlich Schaden dadurch abgewendet werden konnte. Von Anfang an hatte er auch hier auf meiner Disku Hausverbot. Das hält er auch ein, denn ich gebe ihm keinen Grund, zu intervenieren. Da ich ihn ja auch persönlich kennengelernt habe, weiß ich wer und was er ist. Aber wie oftmals beobachtet: Meistens ist es eine Form eines persönlichen Defizits, welche für manche Menschen das Hauptmotiv ist, Admin zu werden. Man muss sich halt die Frage erlauben, wieso das gerade dort passiert, wo eben Schaden angerichtet werden kann.

Was dich betrifft: A bisserl übermässig viel Temperament hast schon, net woa? --Hubertl (talk) 01:09, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ersuchen um Rücknahme meiner Kandidaturen[edit]

@Moroder: , @Hubertl: , @JLPC: , @Berthold Werner: , @Hydro: , @Famberhorst: , @The Photographer: , @Halavar: , @Mattbuck: , @XRay: , @Alvesgaspar: , @Code: , @Christian Ferrer: , @King of Hearts: , @P e z i: .

Nachdem ich durch die missbräuchliche Sperre durch Admin A.Savin die QI-Seite nicht mehr bearbeiten kann, ersuche ich Benutzer die dies lesen folgende meiner Kandidaturen mit dem Kommentar „ Comment I do not like longer harass quality site with my hideous pixel garbage. Game Couterstrike without me!“ so schnell als möglich auf „Withdrawn“ zu setzen:

When I can no longer edit the abusive block by Admin A.Savin the QI-side, I would ask the user read this following my candidature with the comment „ Comment I do not like longer harass quality site with my hideous pixels garbage. Game Couterstrike without me!“ so fast as possible on „Withdrawn“:

sowie am 26. November 2014 die Bilder die von Admin A.Savin im Übegriff seiner administrativen Rechte revertiert wurden / also on November 26, 2014 the files which were reverted by Admin A.Savin in abuse of his administrative rights

Vielen Dank / Thank you --Steindy (talk) 00:22, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should dedicate yourself to take simple pictures as static objects. If you want a sports QI need to buy a camera and lens too expensive, any other factor, is circumstantial. I do not understand how a photo at night in motion can be compared to a full light of day in Motion. I to some extent I agree with you, however, do not enter the field of personal attacks, you should be smart enough emotionally to not take the criticism personally, just understand that some judges QI, are not experts in sport photography. --The Photographer (talk) 12:03, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are absolutely right @The Photographer: ! The 2.8/400 mm lens that I had borrowed from Wikimedia Austria and my Canon 50D is qualitatively completely inadequate. Especially if an idiot as a photographer behind it, which has 35 years of experience with sports and soccer photos. And no, do the experts of good weather photos in the best light and static subjects are highly competent for judging what it says under floodlights with about 700–1200 lux - the stadium in Wiener Neustadt has exactly 755(!) lux^[1] - to photograph fast sports. These experts also know exactly about en:Color temperature, en:Relative luminance, en:Chromaticity and others plenty of them. I give up, because it is useless to argue with those users who believe they have eaten the wisdom with a spoon. These users is to it at any time, to provoke others to incandescence. Anyway, thank you for your encouragement.

Can you please meet my above request? I do not want to bother you with my pixel garbage, the self-congratulation on QI. Kind regards --Steindy (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have promoted some of Steindy's photos in the past, and I've declined some. Can't remember a conflict based on that. Maybe my arguments have been objective and valid. We have some judges at QIC which are definitely nitpicking and some, who judge images without having any experience in special thematics. That's rather unpleasant. I am sure that it is wrong, stubborn enforce the rules, without regard to the local photographic situation. It is a false interpretation of the rules. -- Smial (talk) 14:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your encouragement @Smial: ! No, this fair-weather and day-league photographer, assess the QI are absolute experts on sports, football and floodlight Photos (colander to my above reply to The Photographer. These also have the right to provotieren such users with meaningful liberated comments to incandescence. They may be doing so confident that they are protected and not affected by a sysop. a special piquancy it that it just A.Savin who sent me already insulting and threatening e-mails is not too bad this is me to terminate under his abuse of enlargement of rights. This fits exactly to that posturing that has A.Savin S1 as shown in the German Wikipedia.

Can you please meet my above request? I do not want to bother you with my pixel garbage, the self-congratulation on QI. Kind regards --Steindy (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References:

↑ http://www.noefv.at/noefv/resource/626180143050425480_1027876547790373476_t4eHDNR$.pdf Niederösterreichischer Fußballverband, Spielplatzverzeichnis]

Blocked one week[edit]

Vorgeschichte / Prehistory[edit]

User:Livioandronico2013 several personal attack and heavy vandalism[edit]

Extended content

After I had dared one of his pictures on FPC bear a Oppose see here, because there are several completely overexposed had areas Livioandronico2013 (talk · contribs) meant having to return the favor with a total of ten(!) Oppose on QI:

From the times of his arrangements sequence is clear that he can not have the photos viewed. He was concerned only about making my nominations poor and to attack me personally.

After an interruption followed on the same day further processing:

On next day he went with his personal vendetta against me, resembling a staccato, further:

After I had warned the user from further personal attacks, he continued his personal attacks shortly thereafter continue.

More will follow tomorrow. I'm just too tired to pick out the more Difflinks and it makes me deeply concerned to show which character some users here. I with my 60+ years did not need my to let me make a user who lacks any decency, done.

Regards --Steindy (talk) 01:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: One only has to look at the page QI all the things that happened and who the troublemakers. --Steindy (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continued:

Livioandronico2013 but had so still not enough. He continued his personal attacks continued:

In the evening he was supported motivated by Lmbuga and could not get enough of it. Couple makes it just a lot more fun to embark on others.

This was followed by his abuse of COM:AN/U where Livioandronico2013 tried with the worst intentions reassign me something.

Of course, Livioandronico2013 did not forget, in his message to remove about me my opinion because he did not like this. The user thus has a most peculiar opinion as to what rights he has.

3. Dez. 2014, 04:03:04.

But not enough. Livioandronico2013 also continued this morning its continuing campaign of destruction with a true stakkato against my photos...

...and also after a short pause still not enough...

3. Dez. 2014, 14:58:17,

I have no words how to describe the behavior of Livioandronico2013, because you write what you feel, this is actually tantamount to a serious personal attack equal. Therefore, I am abstaining in contrast to Livioandronico2013 such statements. I'm just stunned that energy and stamina that individual users can apply for the destruction of suspected opponents.
Regards --Steindy (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined photos that are not QI and continue to do so if they are not QI. Where would the personal attacks and threats? I showed your, where are mine??? Regards.--LivioAndronico talk 01:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 1. We, at AN/U, not interested to review tye merits of any voting at FP/QI/VI. 2. But I see some unacceptable/attacking/humorous/attacking comments at Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#Consensual_Review_2 from both parties. This must be discouraged. Jee 03:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Some of those edits are simply responses to trolling by Steindy. The comment in question is actually a quote of User:Lmbuga who was already banned, not by LivioAndronico. Also, timestamps of edits do not imply how long it took to evaluate photos (e.g. Preload images in browser tabs). It also only takes seconds to find enough faults in many photos. -- Ram-Man 03:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks Ram-Man for the hints. Livioandronico2013 seems to be new user; so we can give him some considerations. But User:Lmbuga and Steindy are very experienced users and don't eligible for any considerations. I've little experience with Steindy; but User:Lmbuga is infamous for his bad language. Anyway it is better to block or even indef the old xxxs to make room for fresh bloods. :) J e e 05:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

J e User:Lmbuga have certainly wrong to do so, but has often instigated by Troll as I could show before. However it is not a speech of experience is a discourse of education in my opinion. Anyway thanks for your comment.नमस्ते. --LivioAndronico talk 09:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think, for this permanent kindergarten on QIC with ad hominem reviews, revenge votes and similar shit, which has now been transferred to ANU, all three (Lmbuga, Steindy, and Livioandronico2013) deserve a block of at least 1 week. Lmbuga already has been, so what about the other two? I'm gonna wait for some feedback by a third party, and if it is OK, I'll implement the blocks. --A.Savin 15:23, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with A.Savin, this kindergarten on QIC disruptive. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A.Savin, see my comment above. You can block both of them if they made one more attack (here or in QIC). J e e 15:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No need for more blocks in my opinion. But these two editors must comply with three simple rules which are part of QIC (and of Wikimedia's culture, in general): i) All editors have the same right to participate and express their opinions: ii) all opinions/votes have the same weight; and iii) image reviews should only address the pictures, never the authors or the reviewers. Considering that a block is to be taken as a protective measure, never as a punishment, I also believe that the block imposed on Lmuga is exaggerated. Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no excuses for comments like this. This is not something we expect from a user who has more than 9 years here. J e e 16:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A.Savin and why you should never stop me? I declined to poor photo (which moreover too often say that I do not do), and I was stuck and want to stop me? Steindy has quarreled with everyone and you want to stop me? incredible. --LivioAndronico talk 16:34, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now Steindy is quarreling with Jebulon:

Nomination Zlatko Junuzović, player of the Austria national football team. --Steindy 01:02, 24 November 2014 (UTC) Discussion Please denoise the background, and crop out the hand, then I'll support.--Jebulon 14:16, 30 November 2014 (UTC) Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 1. With ISO 1600 granularity is visible. This is perfectly normal. 2. Why should I distort my pictures? My photos are originals night the motto "what you see is what you get". It's about photos, not about who can use Photoshop or other programs better. Retouched photos have no encyclopedic value. --Steindy 12:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Do you want block him too? --LivioAndronico talk 17:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is the status of steindy on wiki in German :Blocked indefinitely. Reason: Kein Wille zur enzyklopädischen Mitarbeit erkennbar. --LivioAndronico talk 17:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know the beginning of the story and who is honest here but to block only who seems the most impulsive and who lost its cold blood in the first one is in my opinion a severe punishment. What is the thing that made him cross the line? Maybe he did it alone, I don't feel that he is alone in this history. It is true that he often start clockwork, but if you keep your calm with him normally there 's no problem. Is it that the beginning? Only because Lmbuga made rewiews not in the tastes of Steindy? Me this is what I understood, maybe I'm wrong and maybe I did not understand correctly Steindy. But if I'm right the less I can say is that I'm not happy at all with the turn of things and of the block of ~~the only~~ Lmbuga. -- ChristianFerrer 18:11, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- @Christian Ferrer: , why do you speak out, if you do not know the cause of the conflict? Why you are not willing to read? More than my chronological listing and Difflinks I can not do that. The cause is the way in the first lines of my COM:AN/U. --Steindy (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Unfortunately, this type of user, cause damage and disease to the community. Such things have helped me develop my own emotional intelligence and observe how far I can get with my patience. I think it is a mixture of inexperience, lack of tact and spoiled. --The Photographer (talk) 18:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Christian: It is a heavy problem of pages like QIC, FPC etc. since long time. Many users meanwhile consider it as a platform for self-adulation and cannot tolerate any kind of criticism. Originally, QIC was an idea of teamwork and learning by doing of photography and postprocessing, and it had worked some years. But what we see now here is nothing but ruinous competition for top positions on lists like this one, with non-ethic behaviour and revenge voting. As for me, I'm not sorry at all to see such egocentric people be banned. --A.Savin 18:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A.Savin Yes, I often think to delete my personal caregories (and counts of my images), it's hard to believe because I have very many categories and many counts of my images however it is the case :). For what I see here it's not Lmbuga who is not happy to see its images not promoted, he is just a hard rewiewer and he is only guilty of to have worse character than me. Of course the insults are not good, but I fully agree with you for not to block only him and that because I do not think he is at the origin of the conflict. -- ChristianFerrer 19:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is another personal attack by Livioandronico2013 (3. Dez. 2014, 19:39:43), because this has nothing to do with commons and Livioandronico2013 does not know the circumstances that led to this lock. It's ridiculous when a rampaging a user with administrator 28,375 articles and 1,649 created new pages holds „Kein Wille zur enzyklopädischen Mitarbeit erkennbar“. I am not shamed for it, but wear this with pride lock, as this shows what kind of act administrators in the German Wikipedia. This lock has therefore been recognized by multiple administrators to be faulty, why was recommended to go to arbitration. After I have therefore concluded with the German Wikipedia, I will not do this.

Since I prefer to let others speak numbers on commons: commonswiki 19.229 Edits and User Steindy has 7014 files – Total image usages 10697 – Distinct images used 3033 (43.24% of all images of user).

But you can send in those users who like defiant children behave and others pursue persistently protect as Livioandronico2013. As a result commons will help for sure and thereby commons certainly better. --Steindy (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@A.Savin: , you can block me if it makes you happy. I hope that you can prove that

I have instigated the dispute,
I continued myself and how livio behave in the same way with a series of discrediting Edits,
I (previously also Lmbuga or) have somewhere attacked or insulted personally Livio.

They should also not only compare pears with apples. The same applies for the Tyrolean colleague @Steinsplitter: . Your derogatory term as a kindergarten shows that you have dealt faithfully with the problem and its causes. Read Difflinks is probably not your thing.
You, mister A.Savin, should further think about your threats and insults with which you had bothered me undesirably on 20.09.2014 and on 24.09.2014 by e-mail and I forwarded as announced to my hedge an admin.
A possible barrier anyway I do not care, because this does not punish me, but commons. --Steindy (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was my last statement in this discussion. I'm going to get out of these discussions, in which I only speaks against a wall. I do not like this evening the evening go bad again. Good night! --Steindy (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For what I see, I think Lmbuga is the one who suffers provocations and he was so fed up that he cross the line. I stand here because I personnaly attended one of these provocations : a nomination by Steindy where Steindy put a note (this nomination is for Lmbuga...) I don't remenber exactly. But I rewiewed this nomination, declined for good reasons and added a comment your note is stupid. So for me Lmbuga was harassed, he could not keep calm and react properly, it is his only fault. It is my point of view. -- ChristianFerrer 19:42, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Steindy to present your situation is NOT a personal attack but simply the truth! --LivioAndronico talk 19:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree with what wrote by Christian that is a wise person. I say and I emphasize once again Lmbuga was wrong to react like that, I would not have ever done. But I emphasize even more openly that was instigated several times and I do not find at all right that has been stopped and only him so heavily. --LivioAndronico talk 19:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Benutzer Livioandronico2013 durfte also weiterhin mit seinen Edits eskalieren und provozieren und läuft auch bis zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt noch ungeschoren herum. Ich dagegen wurde nach dieser Meldung des Beiträgers Ram-Man für eine Woche gesperrt:

The latest changes seem designed to dodge the behavior requirement to prevent being banned, while still being difficult, if not outright hostile. At least one of those images that was "nearly perfect" has some obvious significant issues, and the reasons for promoting are not valid. I ask that an administrator revisit this and see if this qualifies the single offense that is grounds for a ban. Supports of obviously weak photos must go to CR where they bog down the review process. I suspect this is exactly the point (besides the inappropriate thrill of trolling snark). -- Ram-Man 22:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC) Difflink[reply]

Selbstverständlich war der mir gegenüber befangene Admin A.Savin, der mir bereits per e-mail vom 20.09.2014 eine Sperrandrohung samt persönlichen und nationalistischen Angriffen schickte schnell zur Stelle und sparrte mich mit folgenden Kommentar für eine Woche:

Inacceptable for me. With such edits, Steindy consciously damages the QI project and Commons. Reverted, and blocked the user for 1 week. Come what may. --A.Savin 22:21, 3 December 2014 (UTC) (Difflink[reply]

Für den Beiträger Ram-Man und den Admin A.Savin ist es also inakzeptabel sowie „Intimidation/harassment: heavy abuse of QIC process, edit warring“ (zu deutsch: „Einschüchterung/Belästigung, schweret Missbrauch von QIC-Prozess, Editwar“ wenn ich meine eigenen Nominierungen(!) auf QI zurückziehe und andere Fotos mit QI bewerte. Soll ich mich etwa weiter und über mehrere Tage dem Hounding und den persönlichen Angriffen ergeben, damit dies möglcihst viel Benutzer lesen, welch unfähiger Fotograf ich bin? Befinden etwa der Beiträger Ram-Man und der Admin A.Savin darüber, welche Fotos ich gut finde? Ich glaube nicht! Möge sich jeder darüber selbst ein Bild machen, welche Zuträger und welche Admins sich hier wichtig machen. --Steindy (talk) 18:02, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Sysop Mattbuck[edit]

Steindy,

I post the notice above because, as a blocked user, you are meant to get one. It explains various things, links to policies, etc.

You are able to take good quality photographs - looking up at this page proves that. However the ones you nominated from the football game were generally not good enough for QI. Night sports photography is difficult, even in a well-lit stadium, and it is not a surprise that many of these photos did not pass QI. That is not a comment on you, but on how difficult the conditions are. However your behaviour these past few days has been unacceptable. To even imply that you vote will oppose others' nominations as a form of revenge is not how QI works. You have been around long enough, you should know that. I do not entirely know what your issue with Livioandronico2013 is, but I agree with them on the declines of your football photos. Not out of some vendetta, but simply because they are not good enough. If photos you, I or anyone else nominate are not good enough then they should be declined. We do not make allowances for how difficult a shot was to take.

I encourage you to take the time you are blocked for to calm down and return to Commons and to QI more mellow. Your fellow contributors are not out to get you, we all want the same thing - fun, recognition for our work, and to help educate the world. If however there are particular nominations you made which you feel the need to comment on, then I will convey your messages myself. Please just ping me and I'll pick it up within a day or so.

-mattbuck (Talk) 08:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsch: Mattbuck, ich brauche kein Mitleid, schon gar nicht von Ihnen, wo Sie daran beteiligt waren! Das können sie sich gerne ersparen. Ich weiß, dass ich trotz 35 Jahren Erfahrung in Sport- und Fußballfotografie, davon mehr als 25 Jahre als semi-Profi mit Veröffentlichungen in Zeitungen, Zeitschriften und Bücher, zu blöd bin, gute Fotos zu machen. Ich weiß daher ganz genau, woran ich bei all den großartigen Fotografen die die Weisheit mit dem Löffel gegessen haben, auf commons bin. Ich werde QI mit meinen beschissenen Fotos auch nicht mehr belästigen.

Ich sage es an dieser Stelle nochmals. QI hat stupide Regeln und ebensolche Benutzer, die sich auf diese stupiden Regeln berufen. Diese geben Kommentare zu Fotos ab, von denen sie keine Ahnung haben, wie und unter welchen Umständen diese entstanden sind. Diese stupiden Benutzer lassen auch jeden Anstand bei ihren Kommentaren vermissen und werden dabei nocht vom Administratoren dabei unterstützt! Warum gibt es nur wenige Sportfotos auf commons?

Das Einzige, das ich von Ihnen wollte und weshalb ich Sie angepingt hatte, ist, die oben angegeben Files aus der Liste der QI-Wertung zu nehmen. Dem sind Sie trotz ping nicht nicht nachgekommen.

Wenn commons und insbesondere A.Savin meint, die jenigen schützen zu müssen, die für Stunk sorgen und dafür jene bestraft, die sich dagegen wehren, dann weiß ich bestens darüber Bescheid, was hier los ist. Livioandronico2013 ist sich auch nicht zu blöd dafür, mich mit weiteren Unterstellungen durch den Dreck zu ziehen. Oder wie soll ich denn diesen Kommentar auffassen?

Heben Sie die Sperre von Lmbuga daher auf und geben Sie ihm und auch Livio den Fotografenorden in Gold. Solche Benutzer, die anderen die Mitarbeit auf commons versauen, sind für commons förderlich und verlängern Sie meine Sperre am besten für mindestens vier Wochen, damit ich nicht in Versuchung komme, commons weiter mit meinem Pixelmüll zu belästigen.

Übrigens habe auch ich zahlreiche Eisenbahnfotos; schließlich war die Eisenbahn mein Hauptberuf. Mir würde es aber niemals einfallen, einen Zug von hinten zu fotografieren und dann zu behaupten, dass es ein gutes Foto ist. Züge fahren bekanntlich nicht verkehrt, auch nicht Wendezüge oder Triebzüge. Aber das sind eben die Unterschiede, die unsere Meinungen trennen. Im Gegensatz zum Fußball sind Fotos von Zügen nur dann gute Fotos, wenn diese in ihrer gesamten Länge scharf aufgenommen sind.

English: Mattbuck, I need no sympathy, especially not from you where they were involved! They can save you happy. I know that I do. Despite 35 years experience in of sports and football photography, of which more than 25 years as a semi-pro with publications in newspapers, magazines and books, I'm too stupid to make good photos. So I know exactly what I have eaten the wisdom with a spoon at all the great photographers'm on commons. I will not bother QI with my crappy photos.

I'll say it once again at this point. QI have stupid rules and just those users who rely on these stupid rules. These give comments on photos from, of which they have no idea how and under what circumstances they are due. This stupid user can also any decency in their commentaries miss and are assisted by Nocht administrators! Why there are few sports photos on commons?The only thing I want from you is that indicated above to take files from the list of standings. You have not complied with despite not ping.

If commons and in particular user:A.Savin believes it must protect the person you which provide a stink and punished those who resist, I know very well about it, what's going on. user:Livioandronico2013 is also not too stupid for to take me with further allegations through the mud. Or how should I interpret this comment then?

Therefore retaining the block of user:Lmbuga and give him and the photographer Livioandronico2013 photomedal in gold. Such users who mess up other employees on commons are conducive to commons and extend my best lock for at least four weeks, so I'm not tempted to continue to harass commons with my pixel garbage.

By the way, I also have numerous railway photos; finally, the railroad was my main job. But I would never think of it, to photograph a train from behind and then claim that it is a good photo. Trains depart known not wrong, not even pull trains or railcars. But these are precisely the differences that separate our opinions. In contrast to the football are photographs of trains only good photos when they are captured sharply in its entire length.

--Steindy (talk) 15:11, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noch etwas: Sie brauchen sich mit der Verständigung über meine Sperre nicht wichtig machen. Dies wäre die Aufgabe von A.Savin gewesen. Der scheint dies aber nicht nötig zu haben...

One more thing: you do not need to make important to the understanding of my block. This would have been the object of User:A.Savin. He seems to have this but not necessary...

--Steindy (talk) 15:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, be a dick to those who are trying to help. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:24, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack by Sysop Steinsplitter[edit]

zur Kenntnis: @AFBorchert: , @Cecil: , @Elya: , @DerHexer: , @JuTa: , @Hubertl: , @Smial: , @Berthold Werner: , @Hydro: , @Famberhorst: , @The Photographer: , @Halavar: , @Mattbuck: , @XRay: , @Alvesgaspar: , @Code: , @Christian Ferrer: , @King of Hearts: , @P e z i: .

Admin Steinsplitter ist sich auch nicht zu schade dafür, sich öffentlich bei A.Savin mit dem Hinweis meiner Sperre in de-WP zu bedanken. Abgesehen davon, dass er die Umstände nicht kennt, stellt dies einen persönlichen Angriff des Admins dar, da dies mit commons nichts zu tun hat. Es ist einfach unglaubich, was sich manche Benutzer erlauben!
Admin Steinsplitter is not too bad for publicly at A.Savin with the note in my block on German Wikipedia to thank. Apart from the fact that he does not know the circumstances, this represents a personal attack of the Admins' is because it has' 'no' 'to do with commons. It's just unbelievable what are some allow users! --Steindy (talk) 17:16, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to take a walk in the park, drinking green tea or soda. This activity is only made for fun and pleasure, you should not take things personally. Such situations do you only hurt yourself, it is important to work on your way to manage emotions. Administrators are humans, usually trolls or sociopaths, what do you think is the reason why they are admins?. In your case I would try to take pictures so perfect that nobody can criticize. And please, stop ping everybody, nobody really cares your emotional explosions. --The Photographer (talk) 17:25, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Damit haben Sie zweifellos recht! Es interessiert wirklich niemanden, wenn einzelne Benutzer von bestimmten Personen fertig gemacht werden. Man muss nur lange und oft genug provozieren. Ich bin eben noch in einer anderen Generation aufgewachsen. However, I see it as my right and my duty to point out such insipidities of a Sysop. Best regards --Steindy (talk) 18:31, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, this escalated quickly. Time to cool down Steindy so I blocked your talk page access as well. I hope to see you back at the Commons in a more mellow mood after your block expires. I would appreciate it if the other involved party's take a break from this discussion and perhaps you can continue this discussion after everyone is cooled down. Natuur12 (talk) 19:01, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi alter Haudegen, jetzt hat Dir ein Spitzenfotograph das Licht ganz ausgeknipst. Aber was soll's und mein Senf dazu. Laß die Kirche im Dorf, nimm Abstand zu dem Ganzen und komm entspannt zurück. Gruß Bwag (talk) 22:16, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Das Bild zeigt immerhin mehr als EIN ganzes Auto. --Hubertl (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Steindy, da Du mich angepingt hast, nehme ich kurz Stellung: Nicht jede Reaktion auf QI und FPC ist nachvollziehbar, manchmal erscheinen Urteile auch unfair. Man sollte das dann ggf. in Ruhe ausdiskutieren, den Rat von Dritten suchen oder es ganz einfach ignorieren. Jedenfalls ist es keine gute Idee, seinem Ärger auf diese Weise mit einem persönlichen Angriff Luft zu verschaffen. Und diese Aktion verstehe ich ebenfalls nicht. Unabhängig davon ist aber eine Sache wichtig: Commons versteht sich als Projekt, das zwar mit allen anderen WMF-Projekten eng verzahnt ist, aber in der Beurteilung der Benutzer von diesen unabhängig ist. Von daher wäre die Anmerkung über Deine Vorgeschichte auf de:wp wohl besser nicht gefallen.

Ich sehe, dass Du sehr schöne Sportbilder beigetragen hast. Vielen Dank dafür! So etwas ist sehr willkommen und wegen (der immer wieder auftretenden) Meinungsverschiedenheiten bei der Beurteilung einzelner Bilder sollte man sich nicht irritieren lassen. Wichtig ist, dass diese Bilder unter einer freien Lizenz zur Verfügung stehen und gut beschrieben sind. Und das ist wichtiger als eine QI-Auszeichnung. Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ich habe meine letzten Nominierungen auf QIC zurückgezogen, weil mir das Theater dort bis Oberkante Unterlippe steht. Zuviele Egomanen unterwegs. -- Smial (talk) 15:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

<eingeschoben>Hallo Smial! Ich kann dich nur zu gut verstehen. Dennoch meine ich, dass dies der falsche Weg ist. Ich werde meinen Pixelmüll dort erst recht einstellen, alleine schon, um die Experten der Schönwetterfotografie, die hauptsächlich zur Selbstbeweihräucherung fotografieren, mit meinen Schrottbildern zu ärgern. Daher: überlegs Dir doch noch mal... L.G. --Steindy (talk) 23:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte verstehe mich nicht falsch, ich wollte dies lediglich angemerkt haben und dem admin danken dass das Drama ein ende hat. Ich hoffe dass du auch nach der Sperre weiterhin Fotos hochlädst, deine Beiträge sind willkommen und wertgeschätzt. Ich denke es hat sich soweit nun auch beruhigt und ich habe deinen talkpage access wiederhergestellt (hoffe der sperrende admin hat damit kein Problem). --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:12, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Werter Steinsplitter! Sie brauchen jetzt gar nicht Süßholz zu raspeln, das zieht bei mir nicht, vor allem nicht von Ihnen. Ich bin auch nicht auf Ihre Almosen, die Freischaltung meiner Diskussionsseite, angewiesen. Hätten Sie auch nur einen Funken Anstand und Charakter, so hätten Sie die willkürliche und missbräuchliche Sperre durch Ihren Kollegen A.Savin sofort mit dem entsprechenden Vermerk im Sperrlog aufgehoben. Auch haben Sie nicht den Anstand, sich für die Dankesworte an Ihren Kollegen A.Savin mit dem Ausdruck des Bedauern entschuldigen, ganz zu schweigen, von Ihrer unangebrachten Nachtreterei, dei mit commons nichts, aber überhaupt nichts zu tun haben und daher höchst fehl am Platz sind. Gerade als Admin sllten Sie sich für solche Ausfälle in Grund und Boden genieren. Wenn Sie nicht fähig sind, zu erkennen, wer dieses Mobbing meiner Person begonnen und fortgesetzt hat – ich habe dies bewusst auf meiner Diskussionsseite oberhalb nochmals dargestellt –, dann sollten Sie schleunigst Ihre erweiterten Rechte als Admin abgeben.

Wenn Sie glauben, dass die Sache für mich erledigt ist und ich jetzt beruhigt bin, unterliegen Sie einem großen Irrtum; gerade das Gegenteil ist der Fall und ich werde mir aufgrund Ihrer Nachtreterei, vor allem aber aufgrund der nationalistischen, beleidigenden und drohenden e-Mails und der damit verbundenen Befangenheit missbräuchlichen Sperre von A.Savin noch weitere Schritte überlegen.

Selbstverständlich werde ich auch ohne Ihre Aufmunterung meinen Pixelmüll auf commons hochladen, da meine Schrottbilder weltweit zur Bebilderung gebraucht werden und anerkannt sind. Im Gegensatz zu den Schönwetterfotografen, die sich gegenseitig in den Himmel heben und nur Fotos zur Selbstbeweihräucherung machen, sind meine 7128 Müllfotos weltweit 8426-mal in 139 WP-Projekten eingebunden. Und es wären noch wesentlich mehr, würde ich aufgrund meiner Sperre die de-WP mit der dort per MB verbotenen GDFL 1.2 Lizenz nicht blocken; wenn ich dort gesperrt bin, braucht man auch meine Fotos (ausgenommen jene von WMAT geförderten) dort nicht zu verwenden. Aber das wissen Sie ohnehin genau, da Sie ja meine entsprechenden Seiten/Vorlagen gelöscht haben.

Bleiben Sie daher in Zukunft meiner Benutzerdiskussionsseite fern – auf eine Antwort meiner Zeilen verzichte ich gerne – und machen Sie um den Benutzer Steindy einen großen(!) Bogen; auch Sie haben Ihre Befangenheit gegenüber mir eindrucksvoll nachgewiesen. --Steindy (talk) 23:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Babel[edit]

PH-4

This user is able to take professional quality photographs.

Sorry--83.165.98.5 00:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, unknown IP! But I have to correct, because I produce – it was found impressive as on QI – only pixel garbage. Kindly regards --Steindy (talk) 23:31, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates in Quality Images candidates[edit]

The rules of QI is not required to add geocoordinates to photos. -- (talk) 11:04, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jacek Halicki course it is not a must. Nevertheless, it should be a matter of course, and a service for other users. Or why do you think that you can not only QI, but in all the photos coordinates to specify? Regards --Steindy (talk) 17:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Joachim Löw, Germany national football team (05).jpg[edit]

English wikipedia says it's "Löw in 2011", but in Russian wikipedia it's "in October 2005". Perhaps they misinterpreted the (05) in the file name. Could you please confirm the year when it was taken? Thank you, Retired electrician (talk) 11:27, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Retired electrician! This is pretty self-explanatory. It's the recording date specified. The "05" refers to the photo of the person, since there is a whole series of Joachm Löw of eight photos. Regards --Steindy (talk) 23:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! Retired electrician (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (115).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}}}

Einladung für den Jahreskalender 2016[edit]

Hallo, ich lade dich hiermit herzlich dazu ein Fotos (von dir) für den gedruckten Jahreskalender 2016 von Wikimedia Österreich zu nominieren, die 2015 hochgeladen und mit {{Supported by Wikimedia Österreich}} gekennzeichnet wurden. Gruß --Raimund Liebert (WMAT) (talk) 14:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Falsche Lizenzierung[edit]

Hallo Steindy, hattest du statt GFDL-3.0 vielleicht GFDL-1.3 gemeint? Davon gibt es aber auch 2 Varianten, schau mal hier: Category:GFDL license tags. --Túrelio (talk) 19:56, 31 October 2015 (UTC) Hallo Túrelio, danke für deinen Hinweis! Ich hatte {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} gemeint, weil ich nicht wusste, dass die andere Lizenz nicht mehr gültig ist. JuTa hääte mich zwar auch – so wie du – anschreiben können, doch macht es ihr offenbar mehr Spaß, mir die Hucke mit den Bot-Meldungen so vollzuhauen, dass ich (alter PC) nichteinmal mehr eine Seite öffnen konnte. Das mach so richtig Freude und „beschleunigt“ die Korrekturen umgemein... Freundlichen Gruß Steindy (talk) 20:25, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop re-uploading of the same file[edit]

Hi! I noticed you have uploaded files under the same name multiple times. Please notice it is not necessary to upload the same file multiple times. It won't change the description! If you want to change the Image's description, please click at the file and then at the [Edit] button above. If one or more of the files have been previously deleted, you should not re-upload the file, and instead, should open a thread at Commons:Undeletion requests, once any issues with the file's licensing have been resolved. If you have questions, you may with to review Commons:Licensing or ask a question at Commons:Help desk. Thanks.

If you want to change the name of an image, instead of reuploading it as a duplicate, please use the {{Rename}} template. Revent (talk) 16:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-reading the phrasing of this template, after a ping, I realize that it's horrible. My intent was to point out that a while back you uploaded a set of images (of a soccer match) twice, under different names, and ask that you make sure to just rename them instead. See File:ASK Ebreichsdorf vs. SC Wiener Neustadt 2015-09-22 (84).jpg and File:SRA Sebastian Gruber, SR Alan Kijas, SRA Stefan Pichler 4930a.jpg as a still-existing example. This was not, at all, intended as any kind of warning or anything. @Karl Gruber: , as the person who commented to me. Revent (talk) 17:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Revent: , @Karl Gruber: : Hello! Because I was pressed for time and had to leave to the next photo shooting I had when uploading the pictures forget to rename the files in Commonist. Some pictures I have even moved to the correct naming. However, this had the disadvantage that the file was maintained under original name. Why this is so, I do not know. Therefore I had asked the German colleague Martin H., who helped me sometimes, for helping already on 28 October. Unfortunately, my English is not so good – it's nearely 50 years whren I went to school – that I can read all the instructions that are on commons and also understand. I understand your anger, but mistakes can happen. Martin H. has not yet responded, so the error just been made. Above all, I urge you not to move the files to the one you wan name. I have the principle always to integrate with football matches and not on behalf of the game a player name or something more complete. Therefore, the addition in brackets (per example „ABC vs. XYZ (027).jpg“, „ABC vs. XYZ (028).jpg“, „ABC vs. XYZ (etc).jpg“).

It was my fault, okay. And I will correct it as soon as possible. Also, you will have already made mistakes. My mother tongue is German, your mother tongue is English, why commons is hard for me to understand, but easy for you. Therefore I believe, this is no reason to write me in this way. Regards! Steindy (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eine andere schreckliche Google maschinelle Übersetzung. Es tut mir leid, dass es unhöflich schien, das war nicht meine Absicht, war ich tatsächlich versuchen zu vermeiden, unhöflich, indem Sie die übersetzte Nachricht. Ich habe lediglich versucht, darauf hinweisen, die Fehler, und daran erinnern, über die Möglichkeit, Bilder umbenennen. Ich habe nicht versucht, Sie zu warnen, überhaupt nicht. Ich ein paar von ihnen als Duplikate gelöscht hatte, aber sobald ich merkte, wie viele es waren Ich blieb stehen und links können Sie die Notiz, in der Hoffnung, dass Sie würde dann aussortieren, die diejenigen waren Gesuch und Flagge die anderen als verdoppelt sich.

I am very sorry that the message came across as rude, it was intended simply to be a reminder, not a warning. Revent (talk) 19:51, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Revent: , Apology accepted. I'm quite accustomed to the German WP to bashing (and also from your colleagues A.Savin and Natuur12)

. As I have seen, they have already umbeannt some files on the name that I did not have; per example File:ASK Ebreichsdorf vs. SC Wiener Neustadt 2015-09-22 (69).jpg to File:SCWN30 5291a.jpg, File:ASK Ebreichsdorf vs. SC Wiener Neustadt 2015-09-22 (67).jpg to File:SCWN29 5239a.jpg or File:ASK Ebreichsdorf vs. SC Wiener Neustadt 2015-09-22 (61).jpg to File:SCWN06 5040a.jpg and so on. These are precisely the filenames that I had changed. I thought that with Move & Replace the original Fell name will be overwritten. I'll now anyway change anything and wait until my Martin H. writes an answer how to proceed. Regards Steindy (talk) 20:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that might have been my fault... like I said, I had deleted a few of the duplicates before realizing how many there were. I just moved the three that you mentioned back on top of the redirects, and left redirects pointing the other way. If there are any others that it happened to, feel free to point them out and I will fix it... on the ones that I had deleted, I assumed the version that had the person's name in the description was the intended one. For the other, still existing, duplicates, you can put {{Duplicate}} on the one you don't want, and point at the one it should redirect to (or just wait until Martin can help you out). Revent (talk) 20:53, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. Regards Steindy (talk) 21:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should be sorted now. I moved the names in the descriptions, and personal categories, over to the 'kept' versions as I went through. One pair weren't actually duplicates... they were of some action at the goal, and looked like they were taken a few moments apart....the tool kicked them out because they weren't 'identical', and I kept them both because they were visibly different.

File:Prögelhöf, Pinter, Bauer, Sittsam, Höfel, , Rusek 4989a.jpg and File:ASK_Ebreichsdorf_vs._SC_Wiener_Neustadt_2015-09-22_(57).jpg

The first one's duplicate had already gone away (it was image 60) so I moved it back over that redirect. Hopefully this solves everything. Revent (talk) 01:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, many thanks. I'll look for tomorrow, because I want to bed now. It's 2 o clock in Austria... Good night! Steindy (talk) 01:11, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help for you[edit]

I've just recognised them: Tuncay Şanlı source and Nihat Kahveci source--Sabri76 15:09, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sabri76: Thank you very much for your information. I've added the names und the categorys. Regards --Steindy (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Danke für deine Teilnahme bei Wiki Loves Earth 2016 in Österreich[edit]

WLE logo

Die Jury bewertet nun alle eingereichten Fotos. Die Preisträger geben wir am 31. Juli 2016 auf der Website wikilovesearth.at bekannt.

Bei dieser Gelegenheit möchte ich dich an die WikiCon 2016 Mitte September erinnern, für die noch bis 30. Juni Programmvorschläge eingereicht werden können. Wikimedia Österreich wird wieder Stipendien für die Teilnahme zur Verfügung stellen, genauere Infos veröffentlichen wir Ende Juni. Bei Fragen dazu kannst du dich gerne an uns wenden: verein@wikimedia.at. Liebe Grüße --Annemarie Buchmann (WMAT) (talk) 13:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank Annemarie! Ich habe aus persönlichen Gründen kein Interesse an der WikiCon 2016. Da könnten mir ein paar User über den Weg laufen, auf deren Angesicht ich gerne verzichten kann. Schönen Gruß --Steindy (talk) 15:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editor in huwiki[edit]

Hallo! Unsere Bürokrätin hat dir Das Recht eingeschaltet! Viel Glück! Grüße, --Burumbátor (talk) 07:08, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Burumbátor, vielen Dank! Nette Grüße --Steindy (talk) 08:56, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Europa League FC Admira Wacker Mödling vs. FC Slovan Liberec 2016-07-28[edit]

Hello! The category is empty now. --Brateevsky {talk} 10:08, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know. And soon there will be a lot of photos. Waht's the problem? --Steindy (talk) 17:09, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK! (It's just a notification) --Brateevsky {talk} 17:44, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no notification required. I already know what I have to do. But I'll get back to you when I upload the photos of Terek Grozny. Then you can help the players' names I do not know to write it. --Steindy (talk) 20:29, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logo FCM Traiskirchen[edit]

Anstatt sich über die berühmt-berüchtigten Nutzer mit dem A zu ärgern, die hier auch nur ihre freiwillige Arbeit verrichten und alle anderen Nutzer und die WMF vor Take-Down-Benachrichtigungen und juristischen Nachwirkungen schützen möchten, empfehle ich einmal, über dieses Urteil des Obersten Gerichtshofs der Republik Österreich zu reflektieren. Darin wurde diese Grafik als schützenswert im Sinne des Urheberrechts befunden. Abgesehen davon ist meine Meinung zu Wiederherstellungen keineswegs verbindlich, und darum habe ich in diesem Fall auch nicht sofort die Diskussion abgelehnt und dichtgemacht, sondern hatte auf Beteiligung von anderen erfahrenen Benutzern gehofft. Das nur als Bemerkung am Rande. De728631 (talk) 22:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P. S.: Auch das hier, nämlich "nur" zwei Schriftzüge, hat der OGH als schützenswert deklariert. De728631 (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zu Ihrer „freiwilligen Arbeit“ als (A) hat Sie niemand gezwungen, Sie haben sich darum beworben; also beklagen Sie sich nicht!

Sorry, ich gebe zu, dass meine Bildung nicht ausreicht um zu wissen was „Take-Down-Benachrichtigungen“ sind. Es ist bei mir immerhin schon mehr als 45 Jahre her, dass ich Englischunterricht hatte und mir dieses neumodische denglisch ohnehin ein Graus ist. Es ist daher auch kein Wunder, dass ich nicht weiß, was an dem Logo, das mir per Festschrit vom Obmann des FCM Traiskirchen persönlich(!) zwecks einscannen gegeben wurde, künstlerisch wertvoll und schützenswert ist. Die Übergabe war sicher nur ein Trick, um später klagen zu können. Und wundern Sie sich nicht, wenn ich gereizt reagiere, wenn in de-WP sogar eMails als URV(!) gelöscht wurden, mit denen ich die persönliche Zusendung durch den Obmann des Logos des SC Mannsdorf als URV(!) gelöscht wurden [2].

Da ich schon mehr als genug Zeit mit diesen Lächerlichkeiten verplempert habe, die mir jetzt woanders fehlt, gab es nur die Lösung, den Wiederherstellungsantrag zurückzuziehen. Ich lasse mich doch nicht zum Kasperl einiger Admins machen, sondern bin es sowohl auf commons, als auch in WP, gewohnt, produktive Arbeit zu leisten.

Die Bemerkung („Und Tschüss“), mit der Ihr Kollege Elcobbola den Antrag geschlossen hat, war ebenfalls vielsagend, welche Meinung so mancher Admin vom ach so dummen und ignoranten Fußvolk hat, das nichts anderes im Sinn hat, als das Projekt nur schädigen. Gruß zur Nacht! --Steindy (talk) 23:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ich beklage mich lediglich über die zunehmende Tendenz, dass sobald einmal ein (A) in einer laufenden Diskussion etwas ablehnt, obwohl noch nichts endgültig entschieden ist, pauschal von Willkür und Missbrauch ausgegangen wird. Ja, ich habe mich um den Posten beworben, und bin gewählt worden. Unter anderem, weil ich hier ebenfalls produktive Arbeit leiste. Wenn man mit der Arbeit der aktuellen Wiki-/Commons-Verwaltung nicht zufrieden ist, dann muss man das ansprechen, und wenn das nichts nützt, soll man es meiner Meinung nach halt selbst machen, und zwar besser. Ich möchte nicht wissen, wie groß das Geschrei wäre, wenn alle Admins auf Wikipedia und Commons plötzlich eine Woche lang die Arbeit niederlegen würden... Das "und tschüß" hätte Elcobbola sich aber in der Tat sparen können.

Ich kann aber Ihren Frust verstehen, da man Sie bisher offenbar nicht richtig ernst genommen hat und auch nicht ausreichend erklärt hat, worum es hier eigentlich geht. Im Falle dieses Logos muss ich Ihnen nämlich leider sagen, dass der Herr Obmann da eigentlich keinerlei rechtliche Grundlagen hat, sofern er nicht persönlich die Grafik entworfen hat. Das Urheberrecht in Österreich liegt beim ausführenden Künstler und kann nur im Falle des Todes übertragen werden. Im schlimmsten Fall hätte also nicht der Sportverein, sondern der Grafiker ein "Takedown" (denglisch: herunternehmen des fraglichen Inhalts vom Internet) verlangen, oder gar klagen können, auch wenn der Verein sogar die Nutzungsrechte für das Bild genehmigt hat. Bei solchen Sachen brauchen wir daher grundsätzlich eine Erlaubnis durch den ausführenden Künstler, d. h. den Inhaber des Urheberrechts. Das mag unnötig kompliziert erscheinen, aber das haben sich nicht die Admins im stillen Kämmerlein ausgedacht, sondern es ist irgendwann mal durch den Konsens der Commons-Nutzer entstanden. Und, wie bereits gesagt, die Einschätzung zu der sog. Schöpfungshöhe der Grafik kam bisher von mir allein aufgrund der Beispiele des OGH, und muss gar nicht mal richtig sein. Ich hoffe, trotzdem, dass Sie sich nicht dauerhaft von solchen bürokratischen Prozessen abschrecken lassen, und weiterhin Ihre bisher wirklich produktive Arbeit im Sinne von hochwertigen Fotos und anderen Bildern verrichten. Einen schönen Gruß zum Abend aus dem Norden des nördlichen Nachbarlandes. De728631 (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Man hat mich nicht nur „bisher offenbar nicht richtig ernst genommen“, vielmehr erzählt jeder Admin etwas anderes und offensichtlich findet hier nur ein Schattenboxen statt. Es gibt keine einzige offizielle Richtlinie und jeder Admin hat seine eigene Regelauslegung. Und danach sollen sich die Benutzer richten? Ihr Kollege AFBorchert, zu dem ich aufgrund seiner überlegten Ausführungen an sich uneingeschränktes Vertrauen habe, hatte mir vorgeschlagen, dass der Obmann des Vereins dieses Freigabeformular an commons senden soll. In diesem wird explizit der Inhaber/in des (...) Nutzungsrechts genannat. Sie schreiben mir jetzt, dass der, der die Datei freigibt, der ausführenden Künstler sein muss!

Was gilt jetzt??? Urheberrecht oder Nutzungsrecht???
Wer erstellt solche ~~xxxxxxxxxxx~~ Mail-Vorlagen???
Wer erkennt solche ~~xxxxxxxxxxx~~ Mail-Vorlagen an???

Ich hatte damals schon Ihren Kollegen AFBorchert darauf hingewiesen, dass das Formular so nicht korrekt ist und auf den Urheber hingewiesen. Leider blieb mir AFBorchert bis jetzt eine Antwort auf diese Problematik schuldig. Verständlicherweise deshalb schuldig, weil sich selbst bei renommierten Vereinen kaum in Erfahrung bringen werden, wer letztlich der Urheber des Vereinslogos war. Und das erwarten Sie ernsthaft bei kleinen Vereinen?

Bei mir ist man deshalb an den Falschen geraten, weil ich selbst mehrere Vereinslogos entworfen habe. Beim Niederösterreichischen Fußballverband, dessen Logo von den Vereinen hundertfach verwendet wird, werden es vielleicht noch ein oder zwei Personen noch wissen, weil es erst vor etwa 20 Jahren war. Bei anderen (kleinen) Vereinen, wo heute eine ganz andere Vereinsleitung agiert, wie vor 30 Jahren wird es niemand mehr wissen. Das ist aber auch nicht problematisch, weil es mir (im Gegensatz zu manchem Benutzer, der commons als Abzockplattform missbraucht) nie in den Sinn kommen würde jemanden zu klagen, der mein in freundschaftlicher Verbundenheit entworfenes Logo verwendet. Ganz abgesehen davon könnte ich es gar nicht, weil ich mir die Entwürfe nicht aufgehoben habe.

Für mich war das Kapitel „Bemühen um Vereinslogos“ jedenfalls sehr lehrreich. Ich habe daraus gelernt

es gibt keine einheitliche Richtlinie, es gab auch keine Diskussionen für eine einheitliche Vorgangsweise, ja es gibt nicht einmal den Versuch, eine einheitliche Richtlinie zu finden,
jeder Admin legt die Gesetze so aus, wie es ihm gerade in den Kram passt, weil jeder sein eigener Jurist ist,
jeder Admin macht das, wie er gerade lustig ist, denn löschen bedeutet Macht und die muss man gegenüber dem dummen Fußvolk immer wieder zeigen.

Und wenn man keine Argumente hat, dann kann man noch immer dumme Kommentare (siehe Elcobbola) absondern; deutlicher kann man seine Ignoranz und Inkompetenz gar nicht unter Beweis stellen.

Schöne Grüße in den Norden, --Steindy (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Die Richtlinie auf Commons ist eindeutig. Es gilt hier, dass nur der Inhaber des Urheberrechts (copyright) die jeweiligen Bilder lizensieren kann bzw. Bestätigungen senden sollte. Die Vorlage dazu gibt es leider nicht auf Deutsch, aber die englische Version des Email-Textes spricht ausdrücklich von copyright und copyright holders und "the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright" (der Erschaffer und uneingeschränkte Inhaber des Urheberrechts). Wie man das auf der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia handhabt, kann ich leider nicht nachvollziehen, da ich dort wegen des merkwürdigen Betriebsklimas nie richtig aktiv geworden bin. Dazu kommt allerdings auch, dass es zwischen den einzelnen Projekten, nämlich den unzähligen Wikipedias und Commons, durchaus Unterschiede gibt, was die Vorgehensweisen angeht. Das ist zum Einen durch die Nutzergemeinschaften begründet, die ja je nach Sprache der Wikipedias sehr unterschiedlich sind, und zum Anderen durch die jeweiligen Standorte der Dateiserver. Commons ist z. B. stark am US-amerikanischen Urheberrecht orientiert, weil dort auch die Dateispeicher stehen. Dennoch gilt hier auch der Grundsatz, dass alle Dateien auch im Ursprungsland für jedermann frei verfügbar und verwendbar sein müssen. Für lokale (!) Wikipedias dagegen, gibt es dagegen häufig ganz andere Richtlinien wegen der nationalen Gesetzgebungen. Unklare Begriffe helfen da dann natürlich auch nicht weiter. Ich sehe z. B. gerade, dass auf de.wikpedia nur vom "Rechteinhaber" die Rede ist, was immer das auch für Rechte sein mögen, obwohl gleich im nächsten Punkt von "Urheberschaft" gesprochen wird. Bei derart schwammigen Formulierungen ist es ja kein Wunder, wenn selbst die Admins ins Schleudern geraten. Bei alledem darf man auch nicht vergessen, dass bei all diesen Projekten selbst die Admins unbezahlte Freiwillige sind, die im Normalfall noch nicht einmal in Ihrem eigenen Land ein Jurastudium absolviert haben.

Ob einige Kollegen beim Löschen von Dateien Machtphantasien ausleben, wage ich zu bezweifeln, aber auch sowas mag es geben. Im Gegensatz dazu habe ich auf der englischen WP und auf Commons aber auch schon einige Verfahren erlebt, bei denen Administratoren wegen Missbrauchs der Lösch- und Sperrechte dieser Werkzeugkasten wieder entzogen wurde.

Gruß, De728631 (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo De728631, in aller Eile, weil ich gerade beim Arbeiten (100.000 % eigene und panoramafreie Bilder zum Hochladen vorbereiten, für die ich glücklicherweise keine Freigabe brauche) bin. Wer erstellt den solche bescheuerten Mailvorlagen, mit denen letztlich nichts anzufangen ist? Auf der anderen Seite: soll man englische Vorlagen versenden mit denen der Empfänger womöglich oder sogar vermutlich nichts anzufangen weiß? Das wird wohl nicht der Weisheit letzter Schluss sein. Sie brauchen mir dazu auch nicht antworten...

„Bei alledem darf man auch nicht vergessen, dass bei all diesen Projekten selbst die Admins unbezahlte Freiwillige sind, die im Normalfall noch nicht einmal in Ihrem eigenen Land ein Jurastudium absolviert haben.“ Wie wahr, wie wahr! Dafür nehmen sich diese Leute umso wichtiger, weil sie mit der Verleihung der Adminrechte einen Löffel Weisheit und einen zweiten Löffel Unfehlbarkeit bekommen haben.

In Einem haben Sie aber absolut recht: mit dem „merkwürdigen Betriebsklima“ der de-WP, wobei dies sehr, sehr höflich ausgedrückt ist. Da darf ein Admin, der gerade einmal trocken hinter den Ohren geworden ist und der selbst nicht, absolut nichts(!) aufzuweisen hat, einem Benutzer mit mehr als 60.000 Beiträgen (mir) vorwerfen, „keine Willen zur enzyklopädischen Mitarbeit“ haben und diesen (mich) infinit zu sperren und Auflagen zur Entsperrung (zehn Artikel zu je 5 MB und jeder mit eigenem Foto) festzulegen. Und kein anderer Admin traut sich diesen zu overrulen. Da traut sich ein Mitglied des Vorstands von WMDE, das Projektmitarbeiter beim Vorstandsprojakt „Freiwillige gewinnen und erhalten“ ist, in einem Aufwaschen gleich acht(!) von mir erstellte Artikel mit je 25 MB mit der Begründung „PA in der Zusammenfassungszeile“ löschen, weil ich im Bearbeitungskommentar zwecks Nachweis den Namen des Admins erwähnt hatte. Über andere Vorgänge des Benutzermobbings will ich gar nicht näher eingehen. Leider „muss“ ich in de-WP aktiv bleiben, da ich meine Aufgabe nicht nur als Fotograf, sondern auch als Artikelautor und Artikelverbesserer sehe; dazu gibt es mit Bezug zu Österreich noch viel zu viele Lücken.

Wenn Admins in der en-WP oder auf commons die Rechte entzogen werden, so stellt dies wie in der de-WP lediglich die Ausnahme von dar. Ich wüsste beispielsweise auf commons gleich drei, vier Kollegen, bei denen das besser der Fall wäre. Namen werde ich jedoch keine nennen.

Schönen Abend noch! --Steindy (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Trophies_of_Association_football_in_Austria[edit]

Trophies of Association football in Austria 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 ∙ +/−

Froztbyte (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Ersatzlogo FC Red Bull Salzburg (01).png[edit]

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Ersatzlogo FC Red Bull Salzburg (01).png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Ersatzlogo FC Red Bull Salzburg (01).png]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Martin K. (talk) 16:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Auch wenn Du mir es vermutlich nicht glaube wirst: Das hier hat nichts mit unserer DÜP-Diskussion zu tun. Ich bin über Wikipedia:Dateiüberprüfung/Schwierige_Fälle auf diese Datei gestoßen und habe sie getaggt bevor ich überhaupt gesehen habe, wer sie hochgeladen hat.

Rechtlich ist die Sachlage jedenfalls eindeutig: Das Transparent fällt nicht unter die Panoramafreiheit und selbst wenn würde es dann einen Veränderungsverbot unterliegen. Für dei Veröffentlichung eines so massiv bearbeiteten Crops wäre daher eine Freigabe des Rechteinhabers notwendig. Und nein: Dieser Winkelzug ist ganz sicher kein Weg zur Lösung unseres Logo-Problems.

Nichts für ungut. // Martin K. (talk) 16:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(BK)@Martin Kraft: Hallo Martin, warum fragst du aber nicht Werner? der ist doch jener der Transparent hochgeladen hat und außerdem die notwendigen Kontakte bei Salzburg haben dürfte. Steindy hat doch nur rausgeschnitten aus etwas, was du schon als nicht mehr frei bezeichnest. --K@rl (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Karl Gruber: Wie Du hier sehen kannst hatte ich vor dieser Datei auch das Ursprungsphoto getagt. Nur ist die eben im Gegensatz zu dieser hier nicht in Verwendung. Und im Gegensatz zur hiesigen Datei versucht auch niemand, dass Original-Photo als Substitut für das darin verabeitete Logo zu etablieren. // Martin K. (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Karl Gruber: Lasse ihn reden. Die ganze Aktion ist nichts anderes als hilfloser Versuch des Nachtretens von Martin Kraft. Im Prinzip ist es mir sch...egal ob das Bild der Fahne gelöscht wird. Ich bin kommende Woche beim Cupspiel des FC Red Bull Salzburg dabei um Fotos zu machen und ich kann Dir versichern, dass ich dort das Logo der Salzburger in bester Qualität fotografieren und hier hochladen werde. Wie absurd die Ansichten von Martin Kraft sind und wie er gegen den Strom zu schwimmen versucht, kannst Du übrigens auf de:WD:DÜP#Amokgelöschte Logos nachlesen (Beteiligung erwünscht). --Steindy (talk) 22:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Ergeht nachrichtlich auch an @Hubertl: , der punkto Urheberrecht jahrelange Erfahrung hat. Beteiligung auf de:WD:DÜP#Amokgelöschte Logos. --Steindy (talk) 22:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PPS: Und Sie werter User:Martin Kraft ersuche ich hiermit, Ihre Diskussionen auf anderen Seiten, jedoch nicht auf meiner Diskussionsseite zu führen. Ich mag mit Nachtretern nichts zu tun haben! (siehe dazu auch den Beginn meiner hiesigen Dikussionsseite) --Steindy (talk) 22:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Habs eh gelesen, nur so nebenbei, manchen glauben nicht, dass Transparente auch als dauerhaft angebracht sind. Ich kenne kein Unternehmen, was die Transparente früher runter nimmt, bevor sie hin san ;-) --K@rl (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ersatzlogo FC Red Bull Salzburg (01).png[edit]

File:Ersatzlogo FC Red Bull Salzburg (01).png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Wdwd (talk) 20:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Making a painting or taking a photograph of a copyright image does not give you the copyright. It will still belong to Red Bull - the image is just a derivative COM:DW. The only way to display such an image on a Wikipedia page is to upload it to the local Wikipedia under the fair-use policy (but that option is not available on all Wikipedias)

Machen Sie ein Gemälde oder machen Sie ein Foto von einem Copyright-Bild nicht geben Ihnen das Urheberrecht. Es wird noch zu Red Bull gehören - das Bild ist nur ein Derivat COM: DW. Der einzige Weg, um ein solches Bild auf einer Wikipedia-Seite anzuzeigen, ist, es auf die lokale Wikipedia unter der Fair-Use-Politik hochzuladen (aber diese Option ist nicht auf allen Wikipedias verfügbar)Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:37, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ronhjones: Wollen Sie mir jetzt sagen, dass die Panoramafreiheit in Österreich plötzlich nicht mehr gilt? Ich verweise auf Freedom_of_panorama#Austria. Nach welcher Regel handeln Sie? Wenn Sie auf COM:DW verweisen bedeutet dies, dass hinkünftig keine Fotos von Fußballspielern auch commons hochgeladen werden dürfen, weil auf allen Trikots das urheberrechtlich geschützte Logo des Vereins und des Sponsors zu sehen ist? Oder müssen nach Ihrem Urteil die Logos der Vereine und der Sponsoren unkenntlich gemacht werden? Eine höchst bemerkenswerte Entscheidung von Ihnen, die zu riesigen Schaden für commons führen kann! --Steindy (talk) 23:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vereinslogo und Logo von 3(!) Sponsoren deutlich zu sehen
Vereinslogo und Sponsorlogo deutlich zu sehen
Vereinslogo und Sponsorlogo deutlich zu sehen
Vereinslogo deutlich zu sehen
Logo der FIFA am Ärmel des Spielers – als URV selbstverständlich administrativ gelöscht ...wenn's glücklich macht

Logo der FIFA am Ärmel des Spielers – als URV selbstverständlich administrativ gelöscht ...wenn's glücklich macht
Logo der Firma Swietelsky deutlich zu sehen
Vereinslogo deutlich zu sehen

Logos are copyrightable. If the amount of logo in the picture is insignificant, then it is not counted Commons:De minimis. However a whole picture of a logo is not allowed. If you go over to en-wiki, you will find all the logos (over 120,000) are set up as non-free images en:Category:Non-free logos. You might get a better explanation from a German helper at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright

Logos sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Wenn die Menge des Logos im Bild unbedeutend ist, dann wird es nicht gezählt Commons:De minimis. Allerdings ist ein ganzes Bild von einem Logo nicht erlaubt. Wenn du in en-wiki gehst, findest du alle Logos (über 120.000) als nicht-freie Bilder en:Category:Non-free logos. Sie können eine bessere Erklärung von einem deutschen Helfer an Commons:Village_pump/Copyright Ronhjones ^(Talk) 01:13, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ronhjones: , danke für den gut gemeinten Tipp. Sie werden aber hoffentlich nicht annehmen, dass ich mir diesen ganzen Text durchlese und diesen auch verstehen kann. Immerhin ist es schon mehr als 45 Jahre her, dass ich in der Schule englisch gelernt habe. Und wegen commons werde ich jetzt auch nicht mehr einen Kurs in englischer Sprache belegen. Dass es commons nicht schafft, deutschsprachige Hilfeseiten anzubieten, ist ohnehin ein Armutszeugnis; die deutschsprachige Wikipedia ist immerhin das zweitgrößte Projekt. Offenbar kann sich die reiche Foundation keine professionellen Übersetzer leisten... --Steindy (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Steindy, da ich das zufällig sehe, möchte ich das kurz kommentieren und hoffe, dass das recht ist. In Österreich geht die Panoramafreiheit auf § 54 Abs. 1 Z. 5 zurück, der sich ausdrücklich nur auf Werke der bildenden Künste beschränkt, die „dazu angefertigt wurden, sich bleibend an einem öffentlichen Ort zu befinden“. Das Trikot eines Fußballers wurde eben nicht dazu gefertigt, wie bei einer öffentlichen Statue sich bleibend an einem öffentlichen Ort zu befinden. Stattdessen wird es normal getragen und bewegt und ist nur bei dem öffentlichen Auftritt des Trägers vorübergehend in der Öffentlichkeit zu sehen. Die Intention des Gesetzgebers beschränkt die Panoramafreiheit also nur auf permanente Installationen an öffentlichen Plätzen – das betrifft insbesondere öffentliche Statuen und Architektur. Wenn bei einem Trikot das urheberrechtlich geschützte Logo genügend klein ist, dann kann es als Beiwerk eingestuft werden. Relevant ist hier für Dich § 42e UrhG: „Werke dürfen vervielfältigt, verbreitet, durch Rundfunk gesendet, der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung gestellt und zu öffentlichen Vorträgen, Aufführungen und Vorführungen benutzt werden, wenn sie dabei nur zufällig oder beiläufig und ohne Bezug zum eigentlichen Gegenstand der Verwertungshandlung genutzt werden.“ Wenn Du also ein Fußballspiel oder den Fußballer fotografierst, dann sind die Logos auf dem Trikot Beiwerk, sie sind gewissermaßen ohne besondere Absicht auf das Bild gelangt, da sie unvermeidlich waren, um den Fußballer auf dem Bild darzustellen. Wenn Du hingegen die Kamera auf das Trikot richtest, dann sieht das völlig anders aus. Das hat auch zur Folge, dass Ausschnitte aus urheberrechtlich unbedenklichen Fotos von Fußballern nicht mehr veröffentlicht werden, wenn diese sich auf urheberrechtlich geschützten Ausschnitt konzentrieren. Die oben von Dir gezeigten Fußballerfotos sind somit alle OK mit Ausnahme von File:AUT vs. WAL 2016-10-06 (001).jpg, das sich ganz klar auf das Logo fokussiert. Das Logo ist hier nicht mehr „zufällig“ auf das Bild gekommen. Selbst Fotos mit sehr gut lesbaren Logos wie bei File:SC Wiener Neustadt vs. FC Admira Wacker Mödling 2016-10-25 (18).jpg sind OK, da das (übrigens sehr gelungene) Foto ganz klar auf den Fußballer konzentriert und die Logos auf dem Trikot unvermeidlich sind. Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 05:28, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo AFBorchert! Vielen Dank für Dein Statement. Ich weiß, dass meine Bilder in Ordnung sind – übrigens auch jenes mit dem Logo der FIFA, das ebenfalls nur als „Beiwerk“ aufgenommen wurde und lediglich einen Bildausschnitt darstellt –, da ich in den bisherigen 40(!) Jahren meiner Tätigkeit, auch nur annähernd copyright-Probleme hatte. Ich gebe allerdings zu, dass ich davon 30 Jahre nichts mit besserwisserischen Löschadmins der WP zu tun hatte. Auch das gelöschte Logo war deshalb keine URV, weil es 1. lediglich Beiwerk des Fotos, das ich extra bei der Datei angegeben hatte, war (Du, als Admin kannst es ja noch ansehen) und 2. keine Abbildung des Originals, sondern lediglich eine amateurhafte Zeichnung war. Du darfst mir glauben, dass ich von _allen_ Vereinen der österreichischen Bundesliga eine Freigabe der Logos erwirken könnte. Ich mache es deshalb nicht, weil ich es nicht einsehe, dass ich meine wertvolle Zeit für vandalistische Aktionen der Löschadmins versch... sollte.

Wie man anhand der en:Category:Non-free logos, die mit nahezu 121.000 bestens gefüllt ist, sehen kann, gäbe es sehr wohl Möglichkeiten, Logos vor dem Löschen zu retten. Admins der en-WP schöpfen dies ganz offensichtlich reichhaltig aus. Was tun die Admins der de-WP? Diese erfüllt es mit Freude wenn sie mit toitscher Gründlichkeit und höchster Correctness (ach ja, mit Wdwd mischt ein österreichischer Admin auch tatkräftig mit) die Benutzer vor den Kopf stoßen und in Artikeln vandalieren können.

Vielen Dank übrigens für Dein Lob betreffend des genannten Fotos. Ohne von mir eingenommen zu sein wage ich zu behaupten, dass ich eine ganze Reihe höchst qualitativer Fotos dieser Art WP zur Verfügung gestellt habe. Ja ich gehe sogar weiter, dass ich behaupte dass ich weltweit der einzige Benutzer bin, der reihenweise Fußballbilder dieser Qualität liefert, was sich auch in den Verwendungszahlen meiner Bilder ablesen lässt. Nur rede ich nicht viel darüber, da dies nur die Neidgenossenschaft der WP mobilisiert. Immerhin habe ich als Dank dafür schon ein schön gefülltes Sperrlogbuch, in dem sogar schon zweimal „infinit“ steht. Dass ich dadurch jegliche Achtung vor einigen dieser Admins verloren habe, ist wohl naheliegend. Für mich bist Du einer der wenigen Admins, die immer wieder (aber leider viel zu selten) mit brillanten Analysen und Entscheidungen hervorstechen. Das ist eben eine Sache der persönlichen Intelligenz. Grüße --Steindy (talk) 21:40, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Du darfst mir glauben, oder auch nicht, hätte ich das Logo der FIFA gezielt fotografiert, dann hätte ich dieses a) in weit besserer Qualität, b) nicht so zerknittert und c) in weit höherer Auflösung hochgeladen. So war es nur der Ausschnitt der Hand eines im Bild befindlichen Spielers. --Steindy (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Steindy, zunächst: Ich weiß, dass Du hochqualitative Arbeit lieferst, sowohl hier als auch in der Wikipedia. Es tut mir weh zu sehen, dass Dir nicht immer die Anerkennung widerfahren ist, die Du verdienst. Zu Deiner Anmerkung bezüglich des Ausschnitts mit dem Logo: Das spielt keine Rolle. Bei der Veröffentlichung der großen Aufnahme ist es nur Beiwerk, beim Ausschnitt eben nicht mehr und damit eine Urheberrechtsverletzung. Der Punkt ist, dass der Ausschnitt für sich alleine veröffentlicht ist und unabhängig von dem Gesamtbild urheberrechtlich beurteilt wird. Ich zitiere hier mal aus einem Urteilstext (13.03.2008 - 29 U 5826/07):

Unwesentliches Beiwerk liegt vor, wenn es keine noch so unbedeutende inhaltliche Beziehung zum Hauptgegenstand aufweist und durch seine Zufälligkeit und Beliebigkeit für ihn ohne jede Bedeutung ist (Schricker/Vogel, Urheberrecht, 3. Aufl., § 57 Rn. 6). Der eigentliche Gegenstand muss derart beherrschend sein, dass das neben ihm erscheinende Beiwerk ohne Beeinträchtigung der Gesamtwirkung des Hauptgegenstandes und unmerklich ausgetauscht werden könnte (Schricker/Vogel, aaO.; Dreier/Schulze, UrhG, 2. Aufl., § 57 Rn. 2).

Bei File:SC Wiener Neustadt vs. FC Admira Wacker Mödling 2016-10-25 (18).jpg beherrscht das Porträt des Fußballers das Bild, ein Austausch der Logos würde nicht auffallen. Bei File:AUT vs. WAL 2016-10-06 (001).jpg wird das Bild durch das urheberrechtlich geschützte Logo beherrscht. Wie das Bild entstanden ist (als Ausschnitt eines größeren Fotos) spielt da keine Rolle mehr. Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 18:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo AFBorchert, ich brauche gar keine Anerkennung, ich würde mich schon glücklich schätzen, könnte ich in Ruhe meine Arbeit hier erledigen. Dies ist auch der Grund, weshalb ich oft sehr bissig reagiere. Du brauchst Dir nur die heutigen VMen betreffend Deines Kollegen und betreffend meiner Person ansehen. Anstatt meine Fotoarbeiten für WP erledigen zu können, darf ich mich (zum Schaden von WP) mit solchen Sachen herumschlagen, weil einige Benutzer Langeweile haben und sich Reibebäume suchen, anstatt dass sie Artikelarbeit leisten.

Nun, mein Herz hängt wahrlich nicht an diesem FIFA-Logo und Du kannst es gerne auch löschen, wenn Du der Ansicht bist, dass dieses gegen geltendes Urheberrecht verstößt. Was ich jedoch überhaupt nicht verstehe ist, dass wir ein Wiki haben, die zwar verschiedenste Sprachversionen umfasst, deren Zentrale aber in den USA sitzt, die aber verschiedenste Regelungen zulässt. Gerade bei einem Logo der weltweit agierenden FIFA müsste man doch annehmen (dürfen), dass weltweit das gleiche US- oder meinetwegen, wegen deren Sitz in der Schweiz, auch Schweizer Recht gilt. Denkste, einige Sprachausgaben, allen voran die englische (Logo in der en-WP), aber auch die französische, italienische, spanische, portugiesische, chinesische, russische, japanische, etc. verwenden völlig ungeniert dieses Logo für ihre Artikel. Wenn man also auf das Urheberrecht so strikt bedacht ist, kann und darf es solchen unterschiedlichen Auslegungen meines Erachtens nicht geben. Nicht anders sieht es übrigens mit dem Logo des FC Red Bull Salzburg und vielen anderen Vereinslogos aus. Irgendwie kommt man sich dabei verarscht vor. Nette Grüße --Steindy (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:AUT vs. WAL 2016-10-06 (001).jpg[edit]

File:AUT vs. WAL 2016-10-06 (001).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Be glad "mister" Glad! --Steindy (talk) 07:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hüttenbrenner[edit]

Hallo Steindy, danke für die Korrektur, habe ich da den falschen Spieler erwischt? Soll ich das Bild umbenennen? Danke und Gruß --Ailura (talk) 09:22, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Ailura, gerne geschehen! Ich vermute ziemlich sicher, dass es sich bei dem Spieler um Gernot Suppan handelt. Es wäre sicher gut, die Datei umzubenennen. L.G. --Steindy (talk) 12:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ich habe den zweiten Namen herausgenommen, aber nach nochmaliger Durchsicht der Kategorie würde ich auch sehr stark von Gernot Suppan ausgehen, daher habe ich Kategorie und Beschriftung enstprechend angepasst. LG --Ailura (talk) 12:21, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alles bestens! Ich habe noch die imagenotes hinzugefügt. L.G. --Steindy (talk) 12:36, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Akkreditierung[edit]

Lieber steindy! Ich habe eine Frage, hast du eine Fotoakkreditierung der Bundesliga? Wenn ja, wie komme ich zu einer solchen? Ich habe die Anfrage, ob ich nächstes Jahr für salzburg12 fotografiere, da wäre es nett, wenn ich auch bei Auswärtsspielen am Spielfeldrand sein könnte. LG--Werner100359 (talk) 06:12, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Werner! Nein, ich habe keine Generalakkreditierung für die BL, da ich nach der ungustiösen SG-Anfrage, bei der ich als Denunziant dargestellt wurde, keine mehr bekommen habe. Du musst den Weg über den Verein nehmen, der Dich als Fan-Fotograf für jedes Spiel akkreditieren kann/muss. Sprich einmal mit Christian Kirchler darüber.

By the way: Gibt es auch Meisterfotos von Dir und bist Du beim Cup-Finale in Klagenfurt mit dabei? L.G. --Steindy (talk) 08:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hier sind die Bilder von der improvisierten Meisterfeier zu finden: Category:Meister 2017; Klagenfurt nicht, ich muss am nächsten Tag arbeiten. Fußballmafia ÖFB! :-) --Werner100359 (talk) 06:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Schade, dass es mit dem Cupfinale nicht klappt. Ich finde es auch idiotisch, dass man sich beim ÖFB auf das Haider-Stadion festgelegt hat; und dann noch um 20:30 Uhr an einem Werktag. Offenbar will man beim ÖFB keine Zuschauer haben. Aber Du hättest ja auch einmal müde zur Arbeit kommen können ;-) Das Meisterfoto habe ich schon zweimal eingearbeitet. L.G. --Steindy (talk) 11:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your VFC installation method is deprecated[edit]

Hello Steindy, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: , sorry ich verstehe nur Bahnhof :-0 --Steindy (talk) 18:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Du musst irgendwie das Visual File Change / Perform Batch Task in deiner commons.js loswerden (bzw. auf eine neue Version bringen), weil sonst diverse andere Skripte nicht mehr richtig laden. Aber ich hab auch noch nicht rausgefunden, wie man das macht. --Ailura (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Da in deiner common.js nichts als eine sowieso nicht mehr funktionierende VFC-Installation war, habe ich diese gelöscht. Du kannst das Tool hier (VisualFileChange: “Perform batch task”, including the creation of mass-deletion requests, the insertion of tags or free text, and customized text substitutions) wieder aktivieren. --Didym (talk) 20:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank Didym! Habe ich gemacht. --Steindy (talk) 21:21, 22 May 2017 (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:

File:FC Admira Wacker Mödling vs. FC Red Bull Salzburg (Cup) 2017-04-26 (154).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Das sind keine freundlichen Grüße, Mister EugeneZelenko; Auf solche Grüße kann ich gerne verzichten!

Was soll den an diesen Fotos nicht passen? Es handelt sich um den offiziellen Spielball des Cups und um die offizielle Interviewtafel des Cups, vor der verpflichtend die TV-Interviews gemacht werden müssen. Also beides im öffentlichen Raum. Und das Transparent der Supporter wird bei jedem Spiel des FC Red Bull Salzburg verwendet. Offensichtlich ist es nicht gewünscht, mit qualitativ hervorragenden und professionellen Fotos beizutragen. Ich muss mir wirklich überlegen, weiter mit Bildern zu diesem Projekt beizutragen. Es wäre besser, sich um coppyvios wie ich sie immer wieder auf commons finde, anstatt konstruktive Mitarbeiter permanent zu verärgern. Wenn ihr von österreichischen Themen und den hiesigen Vorgaben keine Ahnung habt, dann lasst besser die Finger davon! Schön langsam reicht es mir! --Steindy (talk) 22:52, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glückwunsch[edit]

Lieber Steindy,

du wurdest für die WikiEule 2017 in der Kategorie:FotoEule nominiert. Wir möchten dir sehr herzlich zu deiner Nominierung gratulieren. Gleichzeitig möchten wir dir für deine Arbeit in den Wikimedia Commons recht herzlich danken. Das EulenBabel für deine Babelleiste funktioniert jetzt auch in diesem Projekt.

Beste Grüße, Deine --WikiEulenAcademy (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ich wurde für die FotoEule 2017 nominiert.

Vielen Dank! Nette Grüße --Steindy (talk) 11:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Diesen Glückwünschen möchte ich mich anschließen. lg K@rl (talk) 08:20, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Auch Dir vielen Dank, K@rl! L.G., --Steindy (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Koordinaten[edit]

Hallo Steindy, etwas scheint mit diesen Koordianten nicht zu stimmen. --Arnd (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank, ich wollte alle auf einmal machen, da ich noch weitere Bilder hochlade. Ich habe es aber jetzt gleich erledigt. --Steindy (talk) 21:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

de:Podersdorf am See[edit]

Danke für die Einträge der Wahlen, Bürgermeister, etc. Nachdem ich da jetzt selber aktiv bin, freue ich mich nicht selber meinen real name reinschreiben zu müssen :) --Flame99 (talk) 14:17, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Flame99: Es ist mir eine Ehre, wenn meine Ergänzungen gefallen. Ich weiß zwar nicht, wo Sie in der Politik anzusiedeln sind und weshalb Sie Scheu hatten, unter diesem Benutzernamen Ihren real name zu schreiben, aber ich hatte mich schon gewundert, dass der Artikel so toll ausgeweitet wurde. Podersdorf ist für mich zwar nicht gerade um die Ecke, dennoch fahre ich jährlich so drei- oder viermal hin um bummeln zu gehen (und wenn möglich zum Winzerfest). Allerdings ärgere ich mich immer wieder, dass man dort nicht einmal am Strand spazieren gehen kann, weil alles abgesperrt und dies auch wenn man keine Badesachen mit hat, nur gegen Bezahlung möglich ist, obwohl massive EU-Förderungen drinnen stecken (dies vielleicht als Anregung, diese Politik einmal zu überdenken). Sie können mir jedenfalls gerne auch in de de-WP schreiben. Nette Grüße --Steindy (talk) 18:25, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wir bekommen ähnliches Feedback von mehreren Seiten und sind gerade dabei in einem sehr offenen Dialog die künftige Ausrichtung und Verwaltung des Tourismus im Allgemeinen und damit auch des Strandbades zu diskutieren. Ganz ohne Einkünfte werden wir halt den Strand nicht betreiben können, die Aufwände für den Betrieb sind hoch. Leider sind wir hier durch den Verbund mit den anderen Seegemeinden über die Neusiedler See Card an einen gewissen Rahmen gebunden. Darum ist es schwer, alternative Lösungen, wie zB freier Strandeintritt und stattdessen Parkplatzgebühren, einzuführen. Übrigens wird ausserhalb der Badesaison und am Abend kein Eintritt verlangt. Und sollten Sie mit einem Hund spazieren gehen wollen, wird ab heuer ein eigener Hundeauslaufplatz am Strand südlich des Yachtclubs verfügbar sein. LG --Flame99 (talk) 08:52, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Flame99 vielen Dank für die Antwort! Ich denke, dass die Gemeinde ohnehin eine Menge an Einnahmen (Kurtaxe, Steuern aus Beherbergungsbetrieben, Restaurants, Geschäften etc.) aus dem Tourismus generiert, aus denen nicht der Betrieb des locker möglich ist, sondern noch ein ein erklecklicher Teil für andere Dinge übrig bleibt. Wenn ihr denkt, anstelle der Strandgebühren sogar Parkgebühren(!) einzuführen, dann macht ihr es meines Erachtens noch schlimmer. Für mich würde das den Eindruck erwecken, dass man den Hals nicht voll bekommt (sorry, wenn es so drastisch ausdrücke). Wie macht es dann beispielsweise St. Andrä am Zicksee, wo alles frei zugänglich ist? Ich kenne Städte (beispielsweise Hartberg), die die Parkgebühren wieder abgeschafft haben, weil die Besucher ausblieben und Geschäfte reihenweise zusperren mussten. Weil dann die Kundenfrequenz so hoch war, haben sie dort zusätzlich zu den zahlreichen Parkplätzen, aufwändig ein Parkhaus gebaut, wo man gegen geringe Gebühr parken kann. Aber ich muss das ohnehin nicht entscheiden, das ist letztlich eure Angelegenheit, was ihr macht. Nette Grüße --Steindy (talk) 00:19, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mariensäule in Kaisersdorf / Burgenland[edit]

Zu 86082 haben wir zwei Mariensäulen:

aus der Denkmalliste, mit einer Immaculata

und

ev. keine Maria, ev. ein Antonius von Padua (lange Kutte)?

Wie man an den Inschriften sehen kann, sind das zwei verschiedene Objekte. Die zweiten Bilder sind jüngeren Datums und stammen von dir, haben dieselben Koordinaten und dieselbe ID wie das erste Bild. Die Inschrift der ersten Säule steht in der Denkmalliste, ob die aber aus einer externen Quelle stammt oder von der Säule abgeschrieben wurde, ist nicht ersichtlich. Kannst du mir bitte helfen, das aufzulösen? Vielleicht kannst du dich noch an die Koordinaten der zweiten Säulen erinnern. Für Hinweise dankbar. lg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:33, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ich kann Ihnen leider dazu auch nichts sagen. Ich bin damals mit meiner Frau anhand der Denkmallisten die Ortschaften und weiß noch, dass wir von einer Bewohnerin dorthin geschickt wurden, weil wir die Säule nicht gefunden hatten. Schade, dass Sie sich erst jetzt melden, denn am Sonntag bin ich bei meiner Tour zum Fotografieren der Gemeindeämter noch vorbei gefahren. Ich kann es Ihnen nur beantworten, wann wir wieder einmal dort vorbei kommen. Nachdem die andere Säule einen Kranz hat, wird meine wohl falsch sein. Grüße --Steindy (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Danke trotzdem, ich gib's dann mal in die große Runde --Herzi Pinki (talk) 01:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ja und viel Glück dabei! Ich glaube kaum, dass da jemand helfen kann, da diese Gemeinde kaum jemand kennen wird und weil wir ohnehin kaum Benutzer aus dem Burgenland haben. Im Dehio Burgenland steht jedenfalls nichts darüber. Und zu allem Überfluss ist die Homepage der Gemeinde auch offline. --Steindy (talk) 01:26, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

zur Info[edit]

Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#No_longer_allow_GFDL_for_some_new_uploads --Ailura (talk) 09:43, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ist mir leider zu kompliziert, das alles zu übersetzen. --Steindy (talk) 11:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Falsche Beschriftung einiger Fotos[edit]

Servus Steindy!

Ich hoffe, dass es dir gut geht und dass du dich von so manchem Benutzer hier nicht unterkriegen lässt. :)

Da ich gerade einen Artikel über den ehemaligen Präsidenten und nunmehrigen Ehrenpräsidenten des slowenischen Fußballverbands Rudolf „Rudi“ Zavrl in Planung habe, ist mir beim Durchsuchen deiner Fotos ein Fehler aufgefallen.

Du hast dich offenbar bei Zavrl und dem ehemaligen Referee Pat Kelly vertan. Zavrl ist der ältere Herr mit den weißen Haaren und der Brille. Siehe dazu auch sein Profil auf der slowenischen Verbandsseite.

Es betrifft vor allem diese Fotos: 1, 2, 3 und 4

Ich würde dich bitten, diese auf den korrekten Namen zu verschieben bzw. die deutsche und englische Bildbeschreibung zu korrigieren.

Vielen lieben Dank & LG, SK Sturm Fan (talk) 22:21, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo SK Sturm Fan! Vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Leider wurde mir da vom Offiziellen des ÖFB was falsches angesagt. Selbstverständlich habe ich die Bilder korrigiert. Das ist immer das Problem, wenn man jemanden fotografiert, den man nicht kennt und die allgemeine Hektik groß ist. Ich freue mich jedenfalls, dass Du das Bild für den von Dir geplanten Artikel brauchen kannst. Viel Erfolg und liebe Grüße --Steindy (talk) 00:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Ich lasse mich schon nicht unterkriegen. Allerdings empfinde ich für manche Admins und manche Benutzer der de-WP nur mehr Verachtung, da diese außer Provokationen nicht viel aufzuweisen haben. Ich habe mich deshalb in der de-WP weit zurückgenommen und schreibe kaum mehr etwas. --Steindy (talk) 00:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WMAT-Jahreskalender 2019[edit]

Hallo Steindy,
ich lade dich hiermit herzlich dazu ein, eine Auswahl Deiner Fotos, die Du ab 1. November 2017 hochgeladen hast und die mit {{Supported by Wikimedia Österreich}} gekennzeichnet sind, für den gedruckten Jahreskalender 2019 von Wikimedia Österreich zu nominieren. Nominierungsschluss ist Sonntag, 4. November 2018. Liebe Grüße, Manfred Werner (WMAT) (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank, Manfred, für den Hinweis! Liebe Grüße Steindy (talk) 18:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandar Djordjevic Fc Wolfurt[edit]

Hallo erstmal. Ich bitte dich mein Foto auf meiner Wikipedia Seite zu ändern und falls es nicht geht zu löschen. Ich hasse dieses Foto,es spricht eher gegen mich als für mich. Ich möchte mit SV Horn dress nicht drinnen stehen und bitte dich jetzt höflichst es zu ändern. Sonst muss ich es über andere Wege machen. Ich spiele jetzt für FC Wolfurt und falls es dir möglich ist ein schönes Foto zu finden wäre ich sehr dankbar. Lg Djordji Djordjibest (talk) 07:59, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (002).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 Good quality. --Ermell 19:02, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (003).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 Good quality. --MB-one 18:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (004).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 Good quality. --Ermell 19:02, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (013).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 -- Spurzem 18:33, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (015).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 -- Spurzem 18:34, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (020).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 -- Spurzem 18:37, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (023).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 and good quality -- Spurzem 19:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (027).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 Good quality. --ArildV 15:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (028).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 Good quality. --ArildV 15:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (031).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 Good quality. --Jolmia 13:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (032).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 Good quality. --Jolmia 13:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (024).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 Good quality. --SH6188 05:10, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Steindy/Archiv 1,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (025).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 Not perfect, but good enough for QI imo. --ArildV 07:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (017).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. --Ralf Roletschek 22:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (021).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. --Ralf Roletschek 22:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (007).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. --Ralf Roletschek 22:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (008).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. --Ralf Roletschek 22:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:42, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (044).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. --DXR 15:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (038).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 05:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (039).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 05:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (040).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 05:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (049).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. --Peulle 12:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (051).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. --Peulle 12:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (077).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 Good quality. --MB-one 15:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (001).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 Good quality. --Granada 11:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (053).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 Good quality. --Granada 11:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (054).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 Good quality. --Granada 11:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (055).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 Good quality. --Granada 11:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (056).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 Good quality. --Granada 11:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (046).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. --Martin Falbisoner 17:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (033).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
Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 15:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (034).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
Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 16:00, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (060).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. --Isiwal 14:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (061).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:42, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (062).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:42, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (063).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. --Isiwal 14:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (071).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 00:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (072).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 03:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (073).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 00:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (074).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 00:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (075).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 00:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (065).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 Good quality. --Ermell 13:25, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (066).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 Good quality. --Ermell 13:25, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (079).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 02:16, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (081).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 02:16, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (035).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. --Imehling 15:03, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (083).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
Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 04:44, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (085).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 Good quality. --XRay 04:55, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (076).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
Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 05:37, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (078).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:16, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (080).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:16, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (093).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (094).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (095).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (087).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 Good quality. --Ermell 07:03, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (089).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 Good quality. --Ermell 07:03, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dietmar Kühbauer(from a picture by Steindy).jpg[edit]

Hi Steindy, das kann nicht einfach so gelöscht werden, weil es noch auf 3 Projekten in Benutzung ist. Diese Nutzungen müssten vorher ersetzt werden. Von welchem Bild von dir wurde das überhaupt erstellt? Ich habe in der Kat gesucht, aber nichts gefunden. --Túrelio (talk) 06:57, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Túrelio, der katastrophale Ausschnitt stammt von diesem Foto in der Category:Teamphotos of FC Admira Wacker Mödling. Die links hatte ich bereits zuvor berichtigt. Diese stammen vom Cache von Wikidata, der offenbar nicht sofort die Daten korrigiert. Ich habe diesen Mangel bereits öfters festgestellt. Vielen Dank und Grüße --Steindy (talk) 11:24, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Datei jetzt gelöscht; war tatsächlich nicht in Verwendung, wurde nur falsch angezeigt. --Túrelio (talk) 09:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank und Grüße --Steindy (talk) 12:13, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (098).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (099).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (100).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (101).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (102).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 I'd prefer higher ISO / higher f to get deeper DoF but good and sharp --Podzemnik 01:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (096).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (042).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. --Imehling 12:13, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Danke .....[edit]

.....für die Verbesserung bzw. die Verbesserungsversuche an meinen QI-Kandidaten! MfG--M@nfred (talk) 06:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gerne geschehen! Ich kann Ihnen PaintShop nur empfehlen. Vieles lässt sich da mit wenigen Handgriffen erledigen. Das Programm beherrscht auch die deutsche Sprache und kostet nur ein paar Euro. Grüße --Steindy (talk) 07:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No attribution[edit]

User:Steindy/Credits Wikimedia uses File:WikiGrenier - Canon EOS 7D Mark II 02.jpg which is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Please comply with the license terms for that file. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 18:41, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I do not understand correctly. Since when do authors have to submit commons? --Steindy (talk) 19:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"submit commons" makes no sense. My understanding of German is limited, but maybe it's easier to understand for me if you reply in both English and German. You are using File:WikiGrenier - Canon EOS 7D Mark II 02.jpg in your template, but not giving any attribution for it which the license requires. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 20:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not know what you want. --Steindy (talk) 21:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.de

"Namensnennung — Sie müssen angemessene Urheber- und Rechteangaben machen, einen Link zur Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden. Diese Angaben dürfen in jeder angemessenen Art und Weise gemacht werden, allerdings nicht so, dass der Eindruck entsteht, der Lizenzgeber unterstütze gerade Sie oder Ihre Nutzung besonders." - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:01, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JoKalliauer: can you explain the issue in German? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:06, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lizenzangaben bei Verwendung in commons? Machen wir jetzt vielleicht auch Lizenzangaben in Wikipedia? Bin ich im falschen Film? --Steindy (talk) 21:15, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are not "im falschen Film", nor have you fallen down the rabbit hole. On Wikipedia, when you click an image, you see the attribution. On your template, you don't. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 23:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, I travel down a rabbit hole into a bizarre world — named Wikipedia ;-) --Steindy (talk) 23:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexis Jazz: afaik this is not well explained on commons, and even more exprienced users (Special:Diff/359408708) do the mistake.

@Steindy: Bitte ließ dir de:w:Hilfe:Bilder#Von_der_Dateibeschreibungsseite_abweichendes_Linkziel als auch de:w:Hilfe:Imagemap#Parameter durch. link= oder in deinem Fall desc none ist gem. CC BY-SA 4.0 nicht erlaubt, du bräuchtest dafür eine extra Erlaubnis.

— Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 11:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank @JoKalliauer: ! Ich hatte mir diese Vorlage von einem anderen Benutzer genau so kopiert und die Vorlage meine Bedürfnissen entsprechend angepasst. Wenn ich Sie richtig verstanden habe, sollte es so passen. Grüße --Steindy (talk) 12:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Steindy: Meines Erachtens ja, aber gem. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode.de gilt, dass die Angaben (z.B.Namensnennung) dürfen in jeder angemessenen Art und Weise gemacht werden, die Frage ist ob es angemessen ist. Bei einer Weltkarte wo man die Länder verlinkt ist es nicht anders "möglich", in deinem Fall ist es nicht notwendig imagemap zu verwenden, daher ist es zu hinterfragen ob das als angemessen gilt, man muss nicht immer die Rechtslage bis aufs äußerste reizen. Außerdem wolltest du vermutlich auf w:de:Benutzer:Steindy/who_is_2#Meine_Fotos_für_die_Wikipedia (anstatt w:de:Benutzer:Steindy#Meine_Fotos_f.C3.BCr_die_Wikipedia) verlinken. — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 09:37, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@A.Savin: Afaik You should not edit (too much) in User-space Special:Diff/367165048, removing desc none would be in my opinion enough.

— Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 11:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (108).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (110).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. --Bgag 00:06, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (111).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (113).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 Not as good as the previous one (eyes not really in focus) but acceptale IMO --Podzemnik 01:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (117).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (120).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (122).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:40, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (118).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. --Peulle 07:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (119).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 Good quality. --MB-one 16:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (050).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments The arm on the right is a bit disturbing, IMO.--Peulle 12:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Peulle, new (smaller) version uploaded. --Steindy 13:08, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
is the blurred half-person not a disturbing background? --Charlesjsharp 11:46, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I understand. Is it for my contra? Thank you Charlesjsharp! --Steindy 14:27, 10 September 2019 (UTC)@Charlesjsharp: It is a little bit, yes, but in this setting such background elements are often unavoidable. I find this one acceptable but please feel free to ask for a CR if you want more opinions.--Peulle 17:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
not a problem --Charlesjsharp 08:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (052).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
a disturbing background? --Charlesjsharp 11:44, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I understand. Is it for my contra? Thank you Charlesjsharp! --Steindy 14:27, 10 September 2019 (UTC) Support In this case the background is clearly normal.--Peulle 17:52, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
happy with this --Charlesjsharp 08:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (047).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 null --Granada 17:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
a disturbing background? --Charlesjsharp 11:49, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I understand. Is it for my contra? Thank you Charlesjsharp! --Steindy 14:33, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine for an action shot like this, but I think cropping the sides would improve it - I left a note with a suggestion for the crop.--Peulle 18:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Peulle, thank you for your imagenote. This cut could be made easy. "My" format was born from the fact that I always try to upload all my photos in the format 3:2 or 2:3 (in this case concrete 3,000:2,000 px), so that all photos can be combined. If a user it wants, then he can still choose a narrower appearance. Steindy 13:31, 18 September 2019 (UTC) OK.--Peulle 07:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
as long as they are not downsized --Charlesjsharp 08:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (133).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 Good quality. --Zenith4237 00:24, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (123).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. --Isiwal 07:50, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (124).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. --Johannes Maximilian 06:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (125).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. --Isiwal 07:38, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (126).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. --Isiwal 07:38, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (127).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 Good quality. --Tournasol7 05:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QI Review[edit]

Hi Steindy,

I've reworked the mediaeval screens that you looked at on QI. It seems I put my comment on the wrong images, which I've fixed now. Would you mind looking again if you think they are now QI. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 09:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (135).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. --Bgag 02:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (136).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. --Bgag 02:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (137).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. --Bgag 02:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (128).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. --Isiwal 21:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (129).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. --Isiwal 21:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (130).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. --Isiwal 21:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (132).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 Good quality. --XRay 05:52, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:40, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (143).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. --GT1976 04:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (144).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. --GT1976 04:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (145).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. --GT1976 04:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (146).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 Good quality. --XRay 04:17, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (134).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. --Isiwal 06:58, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QI[edit]

Ich habe nicht geprüft, ob du es noch machst, aber im Sinne der Fairness und um die Situation nicht weiter eskalieren zu lassen, möchte ich dich bitten auf QI von der Bewertung von Bildern von Charles abzusehen. Danke! (English TDLR: Please refrain from commenting on Charles's images in QI.) Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 07:44, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Sebari Sie können gerne prüfen, ob ich seit dem Konflikt noch jemals ein Votum bei Charlesjsharp abegegben habe (siehe meine Beitragsliste). Nein, habe ich nicht, weder negativ noch positiv. Ich bin über das Kindergartenalter schon längst hinaus, vielmehr versuche ich Kollegen zu helfen wenn ich die Möglichkeit dazu sehe [3] → [4]. Ich wüsste auch nicht, welchen Nutzen ICH davon hätte, andere Fotos negativ zu bewerten. Meine Fotos würden dadurch um nichts besser oder schlechter, Charlesjsharp hat das offenbar noch immer nicht begriffen. Als erfahrener Fotograf (ich arbeite seit 1974 semi-professionell) versuche ich immer ehrliche Bewertungen abzugeben, wobei solche immer subjektiv sind, und weise auf Korrekturerfordernisse hin, wenn ich behebbare Mängel finde. Im übrigen verweise ich auch auf die Nachricht, die ich Colin heute Nacht gesendet habe [5]. Nette Grüße --Steindy (talk) 09:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (148).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 00:20, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (150).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (151).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:59, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:40, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (153).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:58, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (157).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:58, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (140).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. --D-Kuru 08:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (162).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. --Bgag 00:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (163).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (164).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. --Bgag 00:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (154).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. --D-Kuru 09:07, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (155).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. --D-Kuru 09:07, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (158).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. --DXR 06:06, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (165).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (166).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (167).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (169).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 01:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (174).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. --D-Kuru 00:57, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (175).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. --D-Kuru 00:57, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (179).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:51, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (184).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 Good quality. --Hanooz 03:56, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (168).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 17:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (185).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 Good quality. --Hanooz 02:08, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (187).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 Good quality. --Jakubhal 04:39, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (188).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 00:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (178).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 Good quality. --Ermell 07:01, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (180).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 Good quality. --Ermell 07:01, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (181).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 Good quality. --Ermell 07:01, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (192).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:55, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (194).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:55, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (196).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:38, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (177).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. --D-Kuru 19:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (198).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (202).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. --GT1976 01:12, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (203).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. --GT1976 01:12, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (004).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (005).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (003).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (023).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (011).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (025).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. --Bgag 00:08, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (029).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. --Bgag 00:08, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (030).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. --Bgag 00:08, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (195).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:43, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (197).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:43, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (190).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
Don't you think it's tilted? --Podzemnik 00:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is relative in such football photos, regardless of whether they are straight. More important is the presentation. Nevertheless, I have rotated the photo by 1.5°(!) to the right and hope that it fits. --Steindy 17:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hum you'll be right I guess. I'm used to see architecture photos here so my eyes tent to check verticals if they're vertical but I agree that with sport photos it's relative --Podzemnik 07:59, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hertha BSC vs. West Ham United 20190731 (191).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
Don't you think it's tilted? --Podzemnik 00:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is relative in such football photos, regardless of whether they are straight. More important is the presentation. Nevertheless, I have rotated the photo by 1.5°(!) to the right and hope that it fits. --Steindy 17:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hum you'll be right I guess. I'm used to see architecture photos here so my eyes tent to check verticals if they're vertical but I agree that with sport photos it's relative --Podzemnik 07:59, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Naqsh-e Jahan Square[edit]

Hi. I think there is a misunderstanding here. Three different people have gone to the same place and took three photos from different angles. I just wanted to say that this is not a "collage" so I found these "similar" (nat the same) photos to prove it. Hanooz 18:00, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hanooz, then you have to express yourself clearly. At least I do not think that this is a photo. I had already looked at many pictures from this category before I made the request and found that the photo could not be made in this uniform lighting. --Steindy (talk) 18:47, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I zoomed again. It is suspicious. Hanooz 19:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. The uploader told me in Persian Wikipedia that this is an HDR panorama created using a tilt-shift lens. It is consisted of 25 images. He intends to upload a less edited version. What do you think now? Hanooz 07:41, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (032).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. --Bgag 00:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (033).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:36, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (035).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. --Bgag 00:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (037).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. --Bgag 00:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (026).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:24, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (027).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:24, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (038).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:32, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:3rd Global Climate Strike Berlin FridaysForFuture demonstration view from stage 50.jpg[edit]

Du hast 3rd Global Climate Strike Berlin FridaysForFuture demonstration view from stage 50.jpg bei QI abgelehnt, weil "Oppose Sorry! I do not think that the photo is compatible with the DGSVO/GDPR.". Ich dachte bisher immer, dass dies nicht bei Grupper von Personen gilt. --D-Kuru (talk) 20:37, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo D-Kuru, danke für die Rückfrage! Schaue Dir bitte einmal die DSGVO etwas genauer an. Videoüberwachung öffentlich zugänglicher Räume gilt sinngemäß, wobei in diesem Fall die Abgebildeten dauerhaft gespeichert wurden. Da sind Jugendliche und halbe Kinder auf den Bildern scharf aufgenommen, zu erkennen und zu identifizieren, die laut DSGVO besonderen Schutz genießen. Ich meine, dass man mit solchen Sachen nicht spaßen sollte. In unserer Gegend werden wegen der DSGVO nicht einmal die so beliebten Klassenfotos und Kindergartenfotos mehr gemacht. Oder denkst Du, dass wir den gleichen Status wie Facebook einnehmen sollten? Ich persönlich bin da so vorsichtig, dass ich bei Städteaufnahmen Gesichetr unkenntlich mache und bei Autos die Kennzeichen verpixle. Von Rechts wegen müssten diese Fotos meiner bescheidenen Meinung nach sogar gelöscht werden. Grüße --Steindy (talk) 21:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Hey. Just wanted to let you know, I saw your many comments at Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list re: my lack of reviewing images nominated by others. I have been contributing to Wikimedia Commons for a long time and have made over 100,000 edits. However, I am no photography expert, nor am I very comfortable judging images submitted by others because I believe there are better judges than me. Only very recently have I started nominating images by someone else, specifically one editor who clearly takes quality photos. They do not seem interested in nominating their own work, so I'm essentially nominating content on their behalf. I'm not sure your many comments are necessary. I get your point, and I think a talk page comment would have been more appropriate. I don't plan to start reviewing images immediately, but I am learning the process and what makes a nomination successful, so I may consider reviewing in the future. In the meantime, you might want to delete all those comments you left, which just stretch the captions out a ton. I hear you. :) -Another Believer (talk) 20:52, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not a photography expert, how can you judge if the photos you have nominated are good? Also, if the photographer is not interested in QI, why do you do that? Moreover, by copying the QIs of another photographer onto your discussion page, they give the impression that they have taken the photos. Sorry, I do not understand that. --Steindy (talk) 21:47, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to understand. Each time, I'm acknowledging I've copied the bot messages from User:Daderot's talk page. I'm doing this because I want to remember which images I've nominated. I wish bots notified both nominators and photographers, which is why I started a discussion at Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#Promotion_notifications_for_nominators. I'll ask again, will you please remove the many "Do you know that QI only works if users not only post photos, but also submit reviews for photos to other users? You take a series of photos, but have not submitted even a single review" comments you left on the candidate page? I got your message but I don't think these are necessary. -Another Believer (talk) 23:16, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I liked having a log of images I nominated for QI status, but I've gone ahead and removed the bot messages on my talk page (even though I acknowledged they were copied over from User:Daderot's talk page). -Another Believer (talk) 23:21, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I still count 6 appearances of "Do you know that QI only works if users not only post photos...", if you'd be kind enough to remove. I do appreciate your reminder re: the need for reviewers. -Another Believer (talk) 02:26, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (038).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (039).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:37, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (040).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (041).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (042).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 Good quality. --Podzemnik 02:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (039).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 --Michielverbeek 06:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (040).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 Good quality. --ArildV 08:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (041).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. --DXR 06:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (042).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 Good quality. --ArildV 08:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (031).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. --Isiwal 09:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Thank you for your great photos! Saayeeh (talk) 00:22, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Saayeeh! Kind regards --Steindy (talk) 00:24, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (043).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 04:18, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (044).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 04:18, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (045).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 04:19, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (046).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 04:18, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (047).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 04:19, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (049).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (052).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Montenegro 2014-05-26 (066).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 Good quality. --Ermell 06:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Montenegro 2014-05-26 (020).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 Good quality. --Ermell 06:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (054).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 03:10, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (055).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 03:10, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Montenegro 2014-05-26 (059).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 enough for QI --Michielverbeek 19:43, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (048).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 Vielleicht beanstandet der eine oder andere, dass das rechte Auge nicht ganz scharf ist, aber ich finde das Bild gut und ausdrucksstark. -- Spurzem 15:22, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (050).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 -- Spurzem 15:24, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QIC voting[edit]

Hi. When you comment at QIC you often seem to be opposing but you don't put the oppose symbol in your comment, forcing those who working the QIC reviews to guess at your intent. Can you please add the oppose (or support or comment) marker to show your intent? Thank you. Seven Pandas (talk) 14:50, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seven Pandas! Who says I want to bet oppse at the moment? I often comment on the photos so that the adjuster has the opportunity to correct any artifacts. You do not always have to immediately put on decline. After I look at my comments later, there is no need to get nervous immediately. --Steindy (talk) 15:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (061).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.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (062).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 03:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (063).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:01, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (064).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 Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:01, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (065).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 03:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (053).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. --Isiwal 07:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (056).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Same as before - can you add the name of the person into the file's name? That'd be great --Podzemnik 03:20, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No! --Steindy 10:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC) Support As long as the description and category include the name, it's OK.--Peulle 12:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (057).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. --Isiwal 07:51, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (067).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (068).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (070).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Montenegro 2014-05-26 (120).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 --Michielverbeek 17:01, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Montenegro 2014-05-26 (063).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. --Peulle 11:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (072).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 01:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (073).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 01:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (074).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 Good quality. --Vengolis 01:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (069).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 Good quality. --Carlos yo 23:16, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (077).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 03:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (078).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 03:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (075).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. --Isiwal 07:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (051).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 sehr schön. --Ralf Roletschek 20:39, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hossein Mahini, Iran vs Montenegro 2014-05-26.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}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (082).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. --GT1976 01:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (083).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (084).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. --GT1976 01:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (085).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. --GT1976 01:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (059).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. --Isiwal 18:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (088).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 Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Im happy for you. MKomeili2019 (talk) 11:52, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hi, I saw some of your photos and fell in love with them! CZE vs FRA (01) - 2010 European Men's Handball Championship.jpg is different and valuable, You also using a specific section for your photos:

This photograph was taken by user Steindy and released under the license...

I am a photographer and I would to have something like that box for my photos. Do I need to submit the request to Wikipedia administrators? MKomeili2019 (talk) 11:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MKomeili2019! The box is self-designed and if you want, you can build a similar box for your photos. Therefore you need no administrators. Regards --Steindy (talk) 08:28, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (095).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:26, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (097).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 04:26, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (086).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
GQ but could you fix the background on the left side? --Armenak Margarian 04:24, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now good thank you! --Armenak Margarian 06:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (099).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. --Bgag 00:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (100).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. --Bgag 00:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (101).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. --Bgag 00:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (104).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 00:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (105).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 00:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (106).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. --Bgag 00:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (110).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. --Bgag 00:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (111).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. --Bgag 00:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (102).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 13:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (103).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 13:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (089).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (090).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (091).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (092).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (076).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (080).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (066).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 16:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (113).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. --Bgag 02:50, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (115).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. --Bgag 02:50, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (117).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. --GT1976 04:29, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (118).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. --GT1976 04:29, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (112).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. --Peulle 08:01, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (114).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:38, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (116).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 Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:38, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (093).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 Good quality. --ArildV 09:02, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (123).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 Good quality. --GRDN711 01:50, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (119).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 Good quality. --Armenak Margarian 05:00, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (120).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Please, fix left side background. --Armenak Margarian 05:10, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 07:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)@Andrew J.Kurbiko: for me it's very good quality but hair and some other part of another fotball player are visible on the left side of background and I think it needs to be fixed, what are you think?--Armenak Margarian 08:37, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Armenak Margarian: Fixed! --Steindy 12:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC) @Steindy: Thank you!--Armenak Margarian 18:41, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (094).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 Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 07:37, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (129).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. --GT1976 04:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (130).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. --GT1976 04:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (131).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 Good quality.--Famberhorst 04:37, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (124).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 Good quality. --Tournasol7 05:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (125).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. --Peulle 08:15, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (126).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 Good quality. --Tournasol7 05:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! SC Wiener Neustadt vs. SKN St. Pölten 2018-05-31 (127).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
Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 05:58, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Montenegro 2014-05-26 (122).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
Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 05:56, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Iran vs. Angola 2014-05-30 (226).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. --Peulle 08:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted/layout Template:QICpromoted/layout Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:24, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:34, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:30, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:25, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:27, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:24, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:24, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:26, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Janniot Sculpture[edit]

Dear Steindy: Sorry if using this page is not the proper way of communicating. Tried e-mail to aon.912180459@aon.at first. Could not include the following download link on the QI page. Here comes the download link for the PSD in full format:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/f5en2wf8ibofyw3/2019-09-30_18-22_G90T3525.psd?dl=0

Best, Axel

Hi Axel! I answered you by mail. Regards --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:57, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

--QICbot ([[User talk:QICbot|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:42, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your QI candidates[edit]

Hello Steindy.
If you have source files of your QI candidates, then you can process them again without errors. And then upload over and re-nominate.
Very friendly, George -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:30, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello George Chernilevsky, thank you for your reference. Unfortunately, I have no interest in re-processing possibly corrupt files, because I can live without negative awards in my photos. I'm not really the type to shoot for awards, but try to make pictures that can be used in Wikipedia or other projects (newspapers, forums). In addition, I still have several thousand (!) Photos, also from past years, which I have not worked because of time constraints and not uploaded. What only surprises me is the energy some users use to disqualify the work of other users. In this sense, many thanks for your great and motivating reviews. Go on like that, this would help!!! I only can shake my head... --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I have thus withdrawn my nominations, as I take note that I'm a crappy photographer and produce only pixel garbage. You and Podzemik can another user to provoke. We have really perfect admins here. --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:52, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought your account had been hacked and was about to block it indefinitely. However, I find withdrawing support for images you've already indicated support for a tad childish, and I advise you reflect on whether that was really a good thing to do. Rodhullandemu ([[User talk:Rodhullandemu|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 18:33, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rodhullandemu! I had to take note that I have no idea about photography and only produce pixel waste. For me it is synonymous with no judgment on the work of other users. I drew the consequences from that. And when I am almost 70 years old, my time when I was childish was long gone. But ask your admin colleagues George Chernilevsky (some examples [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] etc.) and Podzemik (some examples [11], [12] etc. / since this discussion where he did not get right I have never again received a positive rating, but only more negative or no more) if they perhaps are childish, if they want to drive people out of here. In any case, they were successful. Anyway, I'm here just for fun and not to have stress and annoyance, and have drawn the consequences from it. --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:37, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I saw you withdrew support of a lot of my noms of images taken by User:Daderot. I'm a bit confused because I've been nominating many images by Daderot successfully until very recently and now User:George Chernilevsky is rejecting almost all of my entries. I'm not implying George is not assessing fairly, just surprised to see so many rejections when before I was getting many images promoted. -Another Believer ([[User talk:Another Believer|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:40, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at User talk:Daderot, you'll see many images have been promoted, and those were all nominated by me. If any of you have feedback of what's different about my recent images, I'd like to know so I can try to avoid unsuccessful nominations. I certainly don't want to waste editors' time. Template:Ping Curious for your thoughts as well since you're active and familiar with the process. Thanks, all! -Another Believer ([[User talk:Another Believer|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:44, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Another Believer! Unfortunately, I can not give you an accurate answer. Obviously it seems that George Chernilevsky and Podzemnik are picking up certain other users and trying to disgust them. In any case, they have succeeded with me. Because both are sysops, it will be not use to report them because of their disruptive behavior on COM:AN/U. Regards --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:14, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I'm following what's happening, but I've asked for feedback at Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#Should_I_keep_nominating?. Mostly I'm just wanting to understand why my support votes are generally turning into rejections for images of (IMO) similar quality. -Another Believer ([[User talk:Another Believer|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:27, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I never rate authors in QI, just images. And at the age of 52, he is too old to play conspiracy theories. In fact, I am positive and friendly to each user. QI is a great free photo school where everyone can improve their skills if they can accept constructive criticism. Regards, -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course mister Chernilevsky. The earth is also a disc and Christmas comes together with Easter! You are the biggest innocent lamb of commons and have meant it only well.

I have never met a user with such negative energy as you. As a highly intelligent person, do you imagine that you gave 12 (!) Negatives to a single user within less than 20 minutes?

5. November 2019, 15:05:10 Uhr: 5 negative votes
5. November 2019, 15:08:26 Uhr: 1 negative vote
5. November 2019, 15:09:36 Uhr: 1 negative vote
5. November 2019, 15:11:33 Uhr: 1 negative vote
5. November 2019, 15:24:04 Uhr: 4 negative votes (Why only after 12 1/2 minutes? Has it taken so long to find my crap?)

You have the last two positive reviews still forgotten. So that you do not have to do the effort I have deleted this myself [13], [14]. There could have been something else here too? Anyway, you can be proud of it, because nobody can do it for sure. And as a special insolence you then strike with sweet words on my discussion page. I can do without such a "great free photo school". As you can see in my photos, my abilities are very limited, which is why I came to QI with the consequences. I am always accessible to constructive criticism and I also like to help other users. With such bashing actions I have however the nose completely full.

Therefore I do not attach importance to further discussions with you. You have reached your destination and you have to act it with your own conscience, not with me. E.O.D. --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer Well, I could dig up more diffs like [15] but let's not waste our time and be constructive. Basically, what we see here is a typical example of POINT behaviour and it's bringing intentional harm into the community. No worries Another Believer, tomorrow I'll go through all images where Steindy expresssed his support and then withdrew and I'll assess them again. To Steindy I'd suggest - in all honesty and genuity - to take a break from the project. Maybe go for a walk or something. To get things into perspective again. I know it can be a slap for ego to have images declined, but we need to stay objective and realistic about our own photos. It's in our common interest not to lower the bar for QI or FP just because some users can be noiser (or threaten more) than others. --Podzemnik ([[User talk:Podzemnik|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 05:57, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QI[edit]

Hallo! Ich verstehe, dass es manchmal schwer ist, Dinge nicht persönlich zu nehmen. Aber das Internet ist ein schrecklicher Ort und jemand hier hat immer Unrecht. Alles wird viel schlimmer, wenn wir am Ende lange Debatten und impulsive Aktionen haben. Versuche nicht, anderen etwas zu beweisen, ein weiser Mann wird Urteile fällen, die auf deiner Arbeit und nicht auf Worten basieren.

QI is a great tool. It helps not to get lost in all the noise. It helps to promote all the best. And your pics are usually the best. So i hope you will continue your work. Viele Grüße --Andrei ([[User talk:Andrew J.Kurbiko|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:15, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Andrei! Thank you for your approval. As it has been proven, my photos are crappy and have no business on QI. As long as there are such users with such negative energy here, I have nothing to look for here. No one can save me 12 negative reviews in less than 20 minutes. This is certainly a new record from the admin, mister Chernilevsky. I am sure that this will last forever, because a normal user would have been banned long ago. After I have to edit and upload several thousand photos from the last five years, I will continue to burden with my pixel garbage. Nice greetings --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:19, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm heading for the age of 70 at a rate that I would prefer to be slower, but it's clear to me that you are over-reacting to some criticisms of your images by (as we say in English) "throwing your toys out of the pram". That is unacceptable on Commons as an analogy of en:WP:POINT. If you would like some time out to reflect how unfair it is to unfairly manage other users' expectations first by supporting their images, then by withdrawing that support not based on the merits of the images themselves, but by a perceived personal slight, then I for one am prepared to give you that time. I urge you to reconsider, and revert yourself after sleeping on it, which I am going to do now. I will review this tomorrow morning, but if I don't see a change of attitude, I'm afraid go you must. Rodhullandemu ([[User talk:Rodhullandemu|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 01:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's the highlight! Since an admin colleague of you shows a highly disruptive behavior and now you want to lock me? Well then have fun with it! --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 01:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Autotranslate[edit]

Template:Autotranslate --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U[edit]

Template:Autotranslate

De728631 ([[User talk:De728631|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank für Ihre Nachricht De728631. Vielen Dank auch für Ihr Anheizen auf COM:ANU. Diese nützt aber nichts, wenn man nicht anwesend ist. Ich bin eben nicht 24 Stunden am Tag und 7 Tage in der Woche online, weil ich auch noch etwas anderes zu tun habe. Eine Frechheit sondergleichen ist es jedenfalls, dass ich als Beschuldigter nicht einmal eine Stellungnahme dazu abgeben durfte, sondern im kurzen Weg gesperrt wurde. Es muss wohl so große Gefahr in Verzug gewesen sein, dass mir das Recht zum Vorfall etwas zu sagen entzogen wurde. Die Unsitten der deutschen Wikipedia haben sich offensichtlich auch hier durchgesetzt. Aber kar die Admins müssen auch hier zusammenhalten und wenn sich ein Admin über das Verhalten eines Benutzers beklagt, wird der Benutzer kurzerhand und ohne Diskussion gesperrt; Auf die Widerrede kann gerne verzichtet werden, da diese zwecklos ist. Und selbstverständlich braucht auch auf die Ursache des Konflikts, die klar beim meldenden George Chernilevsky gelegen hat, nicht eingegangen zu werden. Es ist mir absolut unverständlich, dass ein durchaus gebildeter Mensch derart negative Energien in einem kollaborativen Projekt entwickeln kann, im Gegenzug aber lediglich über ein Glaskinn verfügt und beleidigt ist.

Zur Sperrbegründung von A.Savin (aka Geisterbanker/S1/Savin 2005): Diese ist mehr als lächerlich, denn wo steht geschrieben, dass ich eine einmal erklärte Zustimmung nicht zurückziehen darf, wo es dafür sogar eine eigene Vorlage – {{unsupport}} – gibt. Aber wenn man A.Savin aus der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia kennt, verwundert auch das nicht mehr. Zur Person des Herrn A.Savin, der mir gegenüber voreingenommen ist, verweise ich zudem auf User talk:Steindy/Archiv 1#Offener Brief an Herrn Savin und User talk:Steindy/Archiv 1#Blocked one week (Anmerkung dazu: Bei User:Livioandronico2013 handelte es sich um einen Sockenpuppenspieler). Übriegns kann ich die dort genannten gegenständlichen eMails mit den Drohungen von A. Savin und dessen Auforderung "...Oder - noch besser - schleich dich einfach..." bei Bedarf gerne als Beleg vorlegen.

Nachdem mir also eine Stellungnahme verwehrt wurde, werde ich eben diese auf meiner Diskussionsseite veröffentlichen, damit sich jeder ein Bild von den Vorgängen hier machen kann. --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:36, 14 November 2019 (UTC) 2. Absatz ergänzt --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:46, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Was Sie als "Anheizen" betrachten, war meinerseits als subtiler Hinweis darauf gedacht, dass eine Sperre hier eben nicht unbedingt das Mittel der Wahl ist, sondern man die Sache eventuell wie gebildete Menschen diskutieren kann. Von den Vorgängen auf der deutschen Wikipedia habe ich keine Ahnung, und sie sind meiner Meinung nach auch nicht relevant für die Bewertung des Falls auf Commons. Wenn Sie aber weiterhin wie in dem oben stehenden Kommentar oder auch weiter unten auf die persönliche Ebene der Herren Savin, Chernilevsky et al. verweisen und sich z. B. über Leute mit einem Glaskinn beklagen, dann kann ich leider nur sagen: "Wie man in den Wald hineinruft, so schallt es heraus." Auf diesem Niveau wird es für Sie nur noch schwerer, Ihren Standpunkt zu vermitteln, und Sie bestätigen im Nachhinein Ihre Sperre durch Savin. De728631 ([[User talk:De728631|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 13:23, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Autotranslate[edit]

Template:Autotranslate

Zugehörige Meldung auf COM:ANU (Permalink [16])

Unacceptable behavior of User:Steindy.[edit]

I am an administrator who is involved in a conflict, so I ask that another administrator consider the situation.
The essence of the conflict: Steindy mistakenly considers himself offended when considering his QI nominations.
Unacceptable remarks from Steindy continue from November 5 to today (November 13).
Have a look to

Steindy also had conflicts on German Wikipedia, see here de:Benutzer Diskussion:Steindy
On Commons unacceptable messages were addressed to me, User:Podzemnik and User:Smial.
This negative behavior lasts 9 days, and i do not think that we should ignore this further. All my attempts to peacefully discuss the situation were unsuccessful. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cmt This appeared to me to be "throwing the toys out of the pram" and I did ask Steindy to consider whether withdrawing support already given, on spurious reasons, was fair to other contributors, but he seems to be persisting, erronously objecting to images on non-existent or irrelevant grounds. If he won't take advice, I suggest he takes a holiday, voluntarily or otherwise. Rodhullandemu ([[User talk:Rodhullandemu|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:40, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this is likely to strengthen his feeling that he is merely being hounded by evil admins. Template:W comes to mind though. De728631 ([[User talk:De728631|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:10, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cmt I support what George Chernilevsky said (thanks for bringing it up!). I also tried to solve the conflict peacefully but the user keeps behaving in a way that is bringing harm into our community. He's obviously targeting me in his actions which I don't mind but I can imagine that it is annoying to other users. I can provide a few more diffs that show unacceptable behavior of the user further: [17] [18]. Particularly edits like [19] [20] [21] [22] [23][24] are hard to deal with and take a long time to fix. I suggested to the user to take a break from the project which he didn't take - perhaps a forced brake would be beneficial for both him and the project. He'll be welcome to come back if he decides to contribute in a constructive way. Regards, --Podzemnik ([[User talk:Podzemnik|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:13, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Done Blocked 7 days; obviously disruptive editing on QIC (see for example difflinks 6+7 above). --A.Savin 00:52, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cmt I don't believe that a block will really change the behaviour of the user and I would have liked to have seen another attempt being made to try administrative persuasion. But I also know that there are always far too few administrators on commons, and that it is therefore hopeless to deal with such cases in a time-consuming and detailed manner. --Smial ([[User talk:Smial|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 09:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Cmt Well, I tried in my usual tactless way(:-), but it's clear he was on a "frolic of his own". Admins are just ordinary users with a few extra buttons, so I don't think he would have been impressed by anyone else having a go at him (as he would see it). Rodhullandemu ([[User talk:Rodhullandemu|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 09:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Meine Stellungnahme dazu[edit]

Teil 1:

Die "friedlichen" Diskussionen von George Chernilevsky schauen so aus, dass er innerhalb von weniger als 20 Minuten nicht weniger als zwölf (!) meiner Nominierungen mit "decline" bewertete, darunter auch solche, für

5. November 2019, 15:05:10 Uhr: 5 negative votes
5. November 2019, 15:08:26 Uhr: 1 negative vote
5. November 2019, 15:09:36 Uhr: 1 negative vote
5. November 2019, 15:11:33 Uhr: 1 negative vote
5. November 2019, 15:24:04 Uhr: 4 negative votes

die bereits von anderen Benutzern positive Voten abgegeben wurden.
Zu allem Überdruss tauchte er dann verhöhnend auf meiner Diskussionsseite auf, wo er meinte, dass ich die Fotos gerne nochmals bearbeiten und dann wieder nominieren dürfe, gezeichnet mit "Very friendly". Wenn dies very friendly ist, dann weiß ich nicht, was George Chernilevsky macht, wenn er unfreundlich ist. Diese zwölf declines in weniger als 20 Minuten sind ein Akt von disruptivem Verhalten, wie ich ihn auf QI und auch sonst noch nie gesehen habe, und der wohl auch nicht so bald wieder geschehen wird. Ich brauche wohl nicht erwähnen, dass ich von George Chernilevsky selbstverständlich noch nie eine positive Bewertung erhalten habe. Deutlicher kann man einem Benutzer (nicht einmal einem Anfänger!) nicht mitteilen, dass seine Arbeit scheiße ist und dass er offensichtlich nur Pixel Müll produziert. Wäre George Chernilevsky tatsächlich an einer positiven Atmosphäre interessiert gewesen, hätte er mich auf meiner Diskussionsseite betreffend dieser Fotos vor den declines anschreiben und darüber diskutieren können.
Gestern hat George Chernilevsky versucht, mich neuerlich zu diskreditieren, indem er bei zwei Photos, bei denen ich auf einen "dust spot" hiengewiesen hatte, schrieb "I do not see the indicated problem" und "Good quality and even awarded as FP. Many reviewers viewed this image. I do not see the indicated problem" (beides bei Photos von Podzemik). Dies soll offenbar zeigen, welcher Idiot ich bin, obwohl ich seit mittlerweile 44 Jahren semi-professionell fotografiere. Wenn ich ihm dann antworte "That you only see defects with me is already clear to me. You have to take a closer look at the photos and do not judge by the name", dann fühlt sich George Chernilevsky beleidigt und läuft hier her. Provokant ebenfalls, dass er bei dieser Nominierung von Podzemik meinte, mich ebenfalls als Idiot hinstellen zu müssen, als er schrieb "Good quality and even awarded as FP. Many reviewers viewed this image. I do not see the indicated problem." Merkwürdigerweise war trotz FP-voting dennoch ein dust spot am Foto [25].
Ich habe noch nie(!) vorsätzlich eine negative Bewertung abgegeben weil ich einen Benutzer nicht mag, sondern immer nach dem entschieden, was ich gesehen habe.
Ja und selbstverständlich gingen die Aktionen von George Chernilevsky auch heute weiter, als er sich ein Photo, das gar nicht ich sondern Andrew J.Kurbiko nominiert hatte, von mir ausgesucht hat, um dieses durch den Dreck zu ziehen. Ist es sein innerer Zwang oder gibt es andere Ursachen dafür.
Wer betreibt also ein Unacceptable behavior? Wer betreibt trotz gegenständlichen Konflikts weiterhin Provokationen? Wer betreibt also weiterhin harassments? Ich oder George Chernilevsky?
Der Gipfel der Frechheit bleibt aber der persönliche Angriff von von George Chernilevsky wenn er hier crosswiki auf meine Probleme in der deutschen Wikipedia verweist, ohne die dortigen Vorgänge zu kennen. Ich bereite dort gerade ein Administratoren-Problem wegen administrativem Mobbing (sechs Einträge in mein Sperrlog binnen elf Stunden) und Missbrauch der Administratoren-Rechte vor und werde diese auch dem Schiedsgericht vortragen. Obwohl es hier nichts verloren hat, mein Hinweis: Mehr dazu hier und hier.
→→→ Wird fortgesetzt. --Steindy ([[User talk:Steindy#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ganz persönliche Meinung von mir: Eine Sperre durch A.Savin ist wie ein Ritterschlag. Du hast alles richtig gemacht. --Ralf Roletschek 23:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leider gibt es ein persönliches Missverständnis.

Sie sind sehr besorgt über die hohe Anzahl von Ausfällen in kurzer Zeit. Ich habe Ihre Arbeit mehrmals überprüft, bevor ich sie bewertet habe. Und erst dann, als ich die Entscheidung traf, gab ich Noten. Es stellte sich daher eine kurze Zeit heraus.

Ich habe viele Male persönliche Angriffe von Ihnen gelesen. Tatsächlich wurden jedes Mal, wenn Sie auf die Mängel anderer Werke hinwiesen, schlechte Kritiken über mich hinzugefügt.

Besprechen Sie die Qualität der Arbeit, nicht die der Menschen, und niemand wird sich bei Ihnen beschweren.

Ich entschuldige mich, wenn mein Deutsch nicht perfekt ist. MfG --George Chernilevsky ^talk 23:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.noefv.at/noefv/resource/626180143050425480_1027876547790373476_t4eHDNR$.pdf Niederösterreichischer Fußballverband, Spielplatzverzeichnis]

[1]