User talk:Taxiarchos228/Archive2011

Archive:
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019

(QICpromoted pictures, edit)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Gatineau - QC - Museum of Civilisation3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gatineau - QC - Museum of Civilisation3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Taxiarchos228, I believe this belong more naturally here than on my talk page. Now, that went very well, congratz! --Slaunger (talk) 19:17, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Slaunger, thank you for the support. If you like other pics of me User:Taxiarchos228/Pics feel free to nominate them. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:52, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. You have contributed with a lot of good photos. I think I will leave it be for now, as the photo here was an especially outstanding one IMO. --Slaunger (talk) 21:16, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Konica Minolta Tower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Dschwen 04:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Skylon Tower2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 18:51, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal - QC - Sendemast Mont Real.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 at the top of the tower suffered a bit from the distortion, but overall ok. --Dschwen 04:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal - QC - Skyline.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 broders are a bit unsharp but still ok. which lense did you use? --AngMoKio 15:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - CN Tower Turmkorb.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice work --Jovianeye 13:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Ontario - GO Transit diesel locomotive.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Jovianeye 13:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm - frontal vom Marsfeld.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments off course --Pudelek 13:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm - Erste Plattform.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments well done --AngMoKio 14:20, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Winterpanorama.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Nice! --Dschwen 17:21, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernmeldeturm Muenster2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments well done --AngMoKio 14:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Pfarrkirche Guter Hirte2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 00:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Wasserturm Haltingen1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 00:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krakau - Rathausturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ein weiteres schönes Phallusobjekt... --Mbdortmund 16:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Skylon Tower3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 23:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Rare: I like the distortion !--Jebulon 11:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fridolinkirche Loerrach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Strange perspective but good.--Jebulon 00:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Georgskirche9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments (de:) Saubere Arbeit, gute Dokumentation. Wo sind die EXIF? Google-Translation: Good work, good documentation. Where are the EXIF? --Ralf Roletschek 23:12, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Paris_-_Tour_Montparnasse.jpg

File:Paris_-_Tour_Montparnasse.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!

Wknight94 ^talk 14:46, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - CN Tower bei Nacht2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not perfect but QI.--Jebulon 16:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tadoussac - QC - Presbyterianische Kirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Jebulon 16:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Invalidendom - Kuppel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, even if the reworking of the sky is visible at high resolution.--Jebulon 16:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC) there is no reworking of the sky --Taxiarchos228 17:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Then I'm wrong, sorry.--Jebulon 18:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Plac św. Marii Magdaleny.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 inspite of the distortion --Mbdortmund 20:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Krakau - Hauptpost.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments saubere Arbeit --Mbdortmund 19:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Huningue - Château d’eau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 19:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Johannis Lüneburg3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Vllt. wäre eine Kategorie für diese leicht verdrehten Kirchtürme interessant,ich kenn einen in Hamm und einen in Schwerte --Mbdortmund 19:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Invalidendom1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 gut.--Jebulon 11:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Sacré-Cœur - Kuppel zur blauen Stunde.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 gut.--Jebulon 11:48, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Johannis Lüneburg - Taufaltar2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 (very)--Jebulon 11:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm - Spitze.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments vllt. etwas dunkler, etwas mehr Kontrast? --Mbdortmund 19:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC) besser? --Taxiarchos228 19:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Ich finde schon. --Mbdortmund 12:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Beuggen Gesamtansicht2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Jebulon 12:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Beuggen Schlosskirche (Deckengemälde) 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Crop a bit tight, but good.--Jebulon 12:28, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Dein Bemerkung bei Flominator

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Weiternutzung/M%C3%A4ngel/Print#Das_Buch:_Die_Alemannen_damals_und_heute_ist_eine_Kopie_von_Wikipedia-Inhalten

Ich bin an dem Bereich Freiburg des Buches interessiert, da ich sehr viele Aufnahmen davon auf commons - z. B. fast alle Kirchen von außen und innen - habe, habe ich den starken Verdacht das ich auch betroffen bin. Und ich habe auch ein gewisses Interesse Mißbrauch nicht zuzulassen.

Gruß --Joergens.mi (talk) 16:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Joergens,

du kannst davon ausgehen, dass die im Inhaltsverzeichnis angegebenen Artikel (das ist ja in der Vorschau) alle fast vollständig (Stand: etwa Mitte 2010) übernommen wurden, allerdings aus Platzgründen nicht alle Bilder. Ich scanne dir mal alle Seite, welche den Stadtartikel zu Freiburg umfassen zu, und schicke es dir per pdf morgen Abend zu. Solltest du noch weitere Seiten benötigen kann ich dir diese auch gerne zukommen lassen. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Krakau-Anfrage

Hallo Taxiarchos228. Du hast viele absolut geniale Fotos, und ich würde gerne eines davon für eine Kollage verwenden: Das Krakau-Bild Wawel-Weichsel-Panorama. Freunde von mir kommen aus Krakau, leben aber nun in Wien, und ich habe für sie ein Foto kreiert, das Krakau mit Wien verbindet. Würde dir gerne das Composing zuschicken und mich über eine Rückmeldung freuen. Liebe Grüße, Sirdaniels

Hallo Sirdaniels,

wenn du das Bild privat (z.B. für einen privaten Fotokalendar oder ein Poster oder ähnliches) verwenden möchtest kannst du das gerne auch ohne Lizenzierung tun. Wenn du das Bild veröffentlichen möchtest (im Internet, in einem Buch, ...) dann bitte mit Angabe des Fotografen (also mich) und der korrekten Lizenz. Viele Grüße zurück --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Demnächst werde ich ein paar schöne Bilder aus Österreich hochladen, ich war im Januar unter anderem in Salzburg und Graz. Vielleicht gefällt dir davon auch etwas. Ein Blick von Zeit zu Zeit in meine Galerie User:Taxiarchos228/Pics lohnt also, sie wird fortwährend erweitert.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Germanuskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice --Chmee2 13:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernsehturm St. Chrischona.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 16:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskirche - Fenster in der Grabkapelle.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 gut --George Chernilevsky 12:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goetheanum Dornach2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good --George Chernilevsky 12:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pico de Teide.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice --George Chernilevsky 12:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Schaft des CN Tower.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 13:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Josefskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice picture! I like the composition --Gaendalf 17:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - St. Maria2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments As for the purpose of this picture it would be better if trees where cut down, but I don't think is good idea generaly. --Sfu 15:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halifax - NS - Faehre nach Dartmouth.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 15:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Paris - Palais de Chaillot2.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Palais de Chaillot2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 I think so, it will be nicer if you rotate image little bit. It's falling, if you want, I can try to do it. --Chmee2 10:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC The picture is not falling. The impression may come because of the shadow of the Eiffel-Tower. --Taxiarchos228 10:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC) The palace has mirror symmetry - tilt is shifted ~0.9°. Lets try make linear line on your computer, you will see. --Chmee2 11:01, 2 February 2011 (UTC)  Done I fixed it. --Chmee2 11:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC) Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus 17:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernmeldeturm Blauen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 18:27, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GR - Steinkirche Cazis3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 18:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chur - GR - Altstadt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 18:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Baie Saint-Paul - QC - Saint Jean Baptiste.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Frage: Warum korrigierst Du die stürzenden Linien nicht vollständig? Ich lasse manchmal auch einen Rest, als Metapher für die Höhe, aber hier scheint mir das zum Standpunkt nichtzu passen. Nebenbei: Schön, dass Du hier so viele gute Bilder einbringst. --Mbdortmund 16:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC) Du hast Recht, ich habe sie vollständig begradigt, außerdem auch die Lichtdynamik etwas ausgeglichener gestaltet. --Taxiarchos228 20:12, 4 February 2011 (UTC) schönes Bild --Mbdortmund 00:53, 5 February 2011 (UTC)  Comment die Farben der vorherigen Version fand ich besser, denn nun hat das Bild einen leichten Blaustich... --Carschten 10:18, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brockville - ON - Railway Tunnel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 16:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Princes' Gates.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jovianeye 06:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ON - Algonquin Provincial Park.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Jebulon 23:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Galluskirche Warmbach - Innenraum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments some blown-out highlights, but overall nice --Carschten 11:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Rathaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 11:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Uhrenturm5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Mbdortmund 11:50, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Am Sande Lüneburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 21:09, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Südansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments saubere Arbeit, nichts auszusetzen --Ralf Roletschek

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Glockenturm2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schöne Komposition --Ralf Roletschek

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Friedhofskapelle.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 17:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Doppelstockwaggons (Go Transit).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Can you add geocodes? --High Contrast 07:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC) don´t know why this is so important here, but I have added the geocode. --Taxiarchos228 15:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC) Although, geocode is not part of the guideline it is encouraged at QI. --Jovianeye 06:45, 6 February 2011 (UTC) QI-image. --High Contrast 23:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Palais du Luxembourg2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Kreiskrankenhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ralf Roletschek

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Uhrenturm6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments for me it's good --Badener 14:23, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm und Marsfeld.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. I added it in some categories. Maybe a geotag of Tour Montparnasse could be useful.--Jebulon 18:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gatineau - QC - Museum of Civilisation2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments more than QI. --Ralf Roletschek

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hallstatt - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Størtebeker 12:32, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salzburg - Salzburger Dom5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 16:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal - QC - Gipfelkreuz Mont Real.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice --Carschten 19:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bettingen - Fernsehturm St. Chrischona.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 19:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - OPP.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 10:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Cecil Street.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me --Letartean 16:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Galluskirche Warmbach1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 13:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Vitra Haus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jovianeye 17:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Marienstatue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I dont know what ISO was used. Noise is visible in the lower dark region. I tried denoising with Neat Image as suggested by Gaendalf and the output is clean. --Jovianeye 01:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC) If the retouched version is really better you can rewrite the image by your edited version. --Taxiarchos228 10:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)  Done --Jovianeye 15:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dreilaenderbruecke 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 OK --Ralf Roletschek 12:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Altes Rathaus Turmuhr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 19:07, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, check the verticals --Tlusťa 19:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)  Comment I suspect that with the chosen point of view, full perspective correction would look odd and unnatural. --Eusebius 20:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 22:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Germanuskirche im Winter1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 10:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Windmuhle auf ile de Noirmoutier.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Mbdortmund 11:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Invalidendom2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 11:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasserturm Rheinfelden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great lighting, everything is visible. IdLoveOne 03:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Johannis Lüneburg1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Pretty good, basically. I don't see any major problems. --IdLoveOne 23:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Library of Parliament.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Mbdortmund 15:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Josefskirche - Glockenturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments very good. --Cayambe 15:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal - QC - Bonsecours Market.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ...Is the building the market? It looks more like a government building. --IdLoveOne 05:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC) This building is a famous landmark in Montreal. It is not a government building, see: en:Bonsecours Market --Taxiarchos228 10:24, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Oh. IdLoveOne 23:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wappen Lerche Loerrach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good sharpness and color, but when white balanced the background is almost purple? Is this thing really red? IdLoveOne 03:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC) For sure it is really red, what colour else should this be? Green? Here the coat of arms File:Loerrach wappen.svg --Taxiarchos228 07:10, 14 February 2011 (UTC)I ask because this is what GIMP did. --IdLoveOne 08:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC) And the automatical gimp-function is a benchmark what for? --Taxiarchos228 10:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)I'll take your word for it since GIMP hasmade mistakes before. IdLoveOne 21:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Burgtor.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Composition very nice. IdLoveOne 20:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Hauptbahnhof2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Cutoff I think but good quality and lighting. IdLoveOne 21:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Hauptmarkt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not liking the foreground darkness, but the quality of the interesting buildings is good. IdLoveOne 21:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Opernhaus - Denkmal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Might be better if the sun were angled differently, but is ok quality and composition wise as far as I can see. IdLoveOne 20:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wollbach - Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Selective noise reduction in sky and shadow would make it even better --Mbdortmund 17:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wollbach - Kirche9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ralf Roletschek 13:29, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sitzenkirch - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice colours and composition --Mbdortmund 22:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Josephskirche Rheinfelden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ralf Roletschek 16:14, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ON - Rogers Centre Toronto.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ralf Roletschek 16:14, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - TD Canada Trust Tower2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I want to promote but I think ads are against policy... --IdLoveOne 06:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC) It is part of cityscape. Folling your rating pictures of the Piccadilly Circus in London could not candidate here --Taxiarchos228 10:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC) The advert is no problem here. --Mbdortmund 13:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - New City Hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments saubere Arbeit --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Evangelische Kirche Märkt4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Lörrach - Röttler Kirche - Glockenstuhl.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tripoint Basel (ws).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Klasse! --Ralf Roletschek 13:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernmeldeturm Muenster - Turmkorb.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments immer diese Aussichtstürme...--Ralf Roletschek 13:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wies - Evangelische Kirche Wies1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.. though the shadows at left could be brightened. QI nevertheless. Please, add geotag. --Cayambe 16:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Panoramaansicht klein.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 depth and looks well-stitched. IdLoveOne 17:50, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herten - St. Josef - Vorhalle.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Interessantes Licht und Perspektive. --Alupus 13:50, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Leslie L. Dan Pharmacy Building.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Personally I don't like that a lot of the foreground is in shadow. IdLoveOne 08:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC) there is no shadow, the street was wet after rain has falling --Taxiarchos228 13:39, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Misplaced criticism meant for this image. IdLoveOne 17:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandern - Evangelische Kirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Saubere Arbeit. --Berthold Werner 18:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wollbach - Kirche10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 visible, all well exposed --Ralf Roletschek 21:21, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tadoussac - QC - Alte Kapelle.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ralf Roletschek 21:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Josefskirche im Winter.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice. --Ralf Roletschek 14:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - St. Nikolaus - Gründungstafel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I like the light very much. Maybe a transcription/translation could be interesting ?--Jebulon 17:51, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wies - Evangelische Kirche Wies2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Ankara 11:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandern - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 to me. --Cayambe 15:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Old City Hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Feuerbach - Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Toronto - ON - CN Tower bei Nacht2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Toronto - ON - CN Tower bei Nacht2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Isteiner Klotz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  SupportVery interesting. -- IdLoveOne 06:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tannenkirch.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great angle. IdLoveOne 09:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Ulrich Kirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 08:35, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - CN Tower - Mainpod Freiluftplattform.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, complicated light --Ralf Roletschek 09:31, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandern - Katholische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 picture. Kippelt aber wohl ein klein wenig nach links, wenn ich mich nicht täusche? --Alupus 22:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Skylon Tower (Aussichtsdeck).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Croucrou 13:34, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandern - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Jebulon 16:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Feuerbach - Kirche6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good shot, main subject nice, inspite of very difficult lighting conditions at left--Jebulon 15:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Kaufhaus Lüneburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 blue of the sky is near the limit IMO, but good--Jebulon 16:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Nicolai Lüneburg - Detail Chorseite.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good and sharp.--Jebulon 16:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Handelskammer Lüneburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Seems to be a very pretty city.--Jebulon 16:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Nordostansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Croucrou 18:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Stettener Schlösschen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 usually dislike the foreground being in shadow, in this case to me the shadow invites you into that courtyard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IdLoveOne (talk • contribs)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Winter2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Clear QI to me.--Jebulon 17:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskiriche - Südwand.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 21:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandern - Evangelische Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 22:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Adelberger Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

OSM

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Exporting_to_Adobe_Illustrator

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montreal - QC - Olympiastadion3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments great picture! --Ralf Roletschek 14:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herten - St. Josef - Orgel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 23:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Rogers Centre (Nacht).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 19:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Graz - Uhrenturm6.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Graz - Uhrenturm6.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Triumphbogen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit blue but good. --Mattbuck 07:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peugeot 607 - 2.7 HDI Facelift.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 02:54, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Autobahnbrücke Pratteln - Fassadendetail2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I instantly recognized it ... (but I miss the geocode) --H005 17:01, 6 March 2011 (UTC) object location added --Taxiarchos228 11:27, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gatineau - QC - Museum of Civilisation.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Klar. A.Savin 10:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Skyline bei Nacht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments --Carschten 15:22, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Street Car.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 22:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Kuppel der Nationalgalerie.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 interesting --Carschten 16:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Parlamentsgebäude (East Block).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --H005 17:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskirche - Bildnis Rudolf III.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments interesting :-) --Carschten 18:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bad Mitterndorf - Pfarrkirche St. Margareta1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments difficult environment, but very good quality --Carschten 18:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto Harbourfront7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schöner Leuchtturm! --Ralf Roletschek 14:08, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Humber Bay und Humber Bay Arch Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 17:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Notre Dame.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments This seems rather too blue to me. Mattbuck 07:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC) I dared to upload an improved version, if that's ok with you, Taxiarchos228. I'd support it as QI now, but as I've become a co-author, I'll leave the decision to others. -- H005 21:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC) Support now.--Jebulon 09:40, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - Bieltor1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 17:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernmeldeturm Nürnberg3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 17:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Beuggen Torhaus (Westseite).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice --Ralf Roletschek 12:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Beuggen Altes Schloss.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 13:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Michael Rheinfelden-Karsau Hauptportal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 16:33, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Schleusen am Rideau-Kanal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 16:52, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - AGO.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 16:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Rainers Marktbreit-Kran

Hallo Wlady!

Rainer sollte die CR2-RAWs aus seiner Canon S95 noch haben, und ich habe sie, denn das ursprüngliche Stitching war von mir. Ich denke mal, dass er nichts dagegen hat, wenn ich sie dir schicke (darüber unterrichte ihn ihn auf seiner Disk). Es bietet sich bei 10MB je Datei an, das über einen Filehoster zu machen, bloß hat Rainer damit noch nicht gearbeitet (vgl. den Diskseitenthread "Kranbilder" bei ihm). Du solltest bald eine Mail von mir bekommen. Grüße, Grand-Duc (talk) 21:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Grand-Duc, in Ordnung. Auf der Adresse habe ich Speicherplatz satt. Allerdings komme ich heute Abend nicht mehr dazu. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of St. Mary in Kraków2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:22, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Fernsehtürme...

...für den Artikel de:Wien geeignet?

Da jemand Tokio nicht drinhaben wollte, nun eine etwas angepaßte Version der 8 wichtigsten Fernsehtürme der Welt. Irgendwie mickrig das Donaudingens ;) --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 11:42, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto General Hospital.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 23:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Laufenburg (Baden) - Panoramaansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Verry good --Böhringer 20:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eichsel - St. Gallus - Marienfigur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 15:06, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Skylon Tower bei Nacht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I'm not shure but for me looks tilted cw --Mbdortmund 17:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)  Support I can't see any tilt. Good shot! --H005 14:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 22:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lunenburg - NS - Lunenburg Academy edit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 15:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernmeldeturm Nürnberg1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Johannis Lüneburg - Marienleuchter.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 to me.--Jebulon 00:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadtkirche Loerrach 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 ok --Carschten 14:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Invalidendom3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 14:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 18:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - BMO Field.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not bad. --Mattbuck 10:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - EGH Trafohaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskirche - Kreuz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teneriffa Gesteinsschichten.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 beautiful composition, sharp, but there is a dust who need to be delete before promotion --Croucrou 21:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 12:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stiftskirche Niederhaslach Glasfenster (Kampf der Tugenden mit dem Laster).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Obenrum leichte Unschärfe, insgesamt aber ok. -- Smial 22:52, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Strasbourg Temple St Paul seitlich-2.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--Jebulon 00:11, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche Rouffach Innenausstattung.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 colors and sharpness. But the compo is not outstanding: needs a crop left and right IMO, and we miss the top part of the frame. But QI to me --Jebulon 00:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm - Aussichtsterasse2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mattbuck 10:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Kaltenbach-Gebäude.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I love this one. --Mattbuck 10:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weiherschloss Bottmingen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 there is a dust in the sky who need to be correct before promotion --Croucrou 17:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 16:37, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fridolinsmuenster Bad Saeckingen 2a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 colours, very clear. -- Cookie 20:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Skylon Tower5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fine. --Mattbuck 11:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Schloss Beuggen Schlosskirche (Deckengemälde) 1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Beuggen Schlosskirche (Deckengemälde) 1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eglise Sainte-Foy Selestat.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 16:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niederhaslach Church full frontal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Scheint ein bißchen mehr zu rauschen, was ein Blick auf die EXIF Daten wohl bestätigt, but still ok for QI. --Berthold Werner 16:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Niagarafälle.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice panorama --Mbdortmund 13:51, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abteilkirche Murbach1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 13:49, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Fridolin - Frontalansicht2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 18:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Josefskirche - Orgel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 01:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden Haus Salmegg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, wqould imo be a bit better if exposure would be a little darker. --Mbdortmund 01:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Paris_-_Tour_Montparnasse_-_Fassade.jpg

File:Paris_-_Tour_Montparnasse_-_Fassade.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!

Civa (talk) 20:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Löwe von Belfort1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Petruskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Johannes Lüneburg bei Nacht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Riviere du Loup - Église Saint-Patrice.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Maybe a little bit tilted to the right side, but good enough for QI to me. --Bartiebert 18:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Auditorio de Tenerife Treppenaufgang.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Stairway to heaven.... --Mbdortmund 10:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 10:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche Rouffach Kirchenschiff.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! --Berthold Werner 09:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Expressive and good. --Alupus 20:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inzlingen - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria imo.--MrPanyGoff 18:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Ufer Sankt Lorenzstrom bei Kamouraska.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria imo.--MrPanyGoff 18:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stiftskirche Niederhaslach Seitenansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mattbuck 12:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Schule.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 18:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Bonifatiuskirche - Glocke.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 QI. --David Perez 08:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Blick nach Osten vom Schloßberg (Blaue Stunde).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think this is tilted clockwise a bit. Mattbuck 11:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC) corrected --Taxiarchos228 15:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC) Lovely. Mattbuck 19:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - ROM3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 20:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inzlingen - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 20:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inzlingen - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 20:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Johannis Lüneburg - Taufbecken.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Pudelek 20:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Graz - Kunsthaus1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Evangelische Kirche Märkt1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Few strange things in the sky (or maybe it's just my eyes) but generally good. --Mattbuck 17:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Galluskirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Could do with being sharper, but generally good. --Mattbuck 17:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wollbach - Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mattbuck 17:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenzach - Michaelskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 09:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lunenburg - NS - Leuchtturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Purdy's Wharf.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 22:00, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Paris_-_Tour_Montparnasse.jpg

File:Paris_-_Tour_Montparnasse.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!

–Tryphon^☂ 11:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wyhlen - Friedenskirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 sharp and otherwise also good. Why are the camera data missing? Please add geotag. --Cayambe 08:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC) there is no EXIF because this is a panorama/HDR, object location added --Taxiarchos228 08:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inzlingen - Katholische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Remi Mathis 15:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - St. Felix und Regula3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Remi Mathis 15:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bern Kaefigturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 10:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenzach - St. Leodegar1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 10:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenzach - St. Leodegar7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 11:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenzach - St. Leodegar9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 10:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teide-Seilbahn Kabine.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 small but ok --Ianare 20:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Vitra Haus - Detail.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks ok to me --Niabot 11:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Holzbruecke Bad Saeckingen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Also OK --Niabot 11:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kraftwerk Ryburg-Schwörstadt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Niabot 11:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Vitra Haus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks fine to me --Niabot 11:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wyhlen - Georgskirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 quality Remi Mathis 18:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NS - Pride of Baltimore II.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 15:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC) Info there is a small dust that can be delete (i put a note on the image) --Croucrou 19:39, 31 March 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 20:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC) Could be a FP on "Commons" IMO...--Jebulon 21:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)  Done Nominated by me... Please go there to support it !! --Jebulon 22:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Arbeiterwohnunsiedlung.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 12:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Tolles Bild mit fast anthroposophischen Farben --Mbdortmund 19:16, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breisacher Munster Gesamtansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breisacher Muenster Tuerme.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 15:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Ansicht auf den Dorfkern.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --BennyJ 13:12, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Wasserkraftwerk - Kran.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Elekhh 21:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Neues Wasserkraftwerk1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 18:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Neues Wasserkraftwerk3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 18:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Christuskirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 14:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inzlingen - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 08:25, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - AGO2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Archaeodontosaurus 18:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lunenburg - NS - Lunenburg Hafen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments geocode would be nice --Mbdortmund 12:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 07:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC) Good quality. --Mbdortmund 06:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC) Sorry, but looks oversaturated to me. --Quartl 08:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC) but it is not indeed, buildings in Lunenburg have strong coulours, especially when sun is shining --Taxiarchos228 08:31, 7 April 2011 (UTC) If you compare other images [1], most have more subdued colors, also in bright sunlight. --Quartl 08:44, 7 April 2011 (UTC) After discussion ok. --Quartl 09:44, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grenzach - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 05:04, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Gratulation!

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		I hereby award to User Taxiarchos228 The Photographer's Barnstar for 10 Featured pictures on Commons, other perfect photos and his admission to the restricted club Meet our photographers. Congratulations! --Quartl (talk) 09:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Panthéon.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Jebulon 22:19, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Invalidendom4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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--Jebulon 22:19, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Hello, I received this, as nominator:

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

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

But it is your work and your reward !

Congratulations. --Jebulon (talk) 15:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for nominating it. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Detail4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 01:25, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Comment to a administrator

User talk:Cookie#Historial de File:Rheinfelden - Christuskirche.jpg, imagen propuesta a QI--Miguel Bugallo 21:30, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Please: if your English skills are so worse that you are not able to make correct conversation get off my back. I sure will not learn Spanish for you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

QI

Du weißt, das ich Deine Beiträge schätze und möchte Dich dennoch mit einer Bitte belästigen. Einige Voten ärgern den Photographen, auch Kommentare, die man für inakzeptabel hält, auch Retourkutschen usw. Meine Bitte lautet, solche Vorkommnisse einfach hinzunehmen oder, wenn's unbedingt sein muss, freundlich Deine Meinung zu äußern. Die breite Mehrheit weiß sich auch ohne Kommentar ein Bild zu machen und der Ärger verfliegt, wenn Du auch eine Fehlbeurteilung einfach mal schluckst. Du wirst eh keine Probleme haben, eine große Anzahl Bilder ganz problemlos ausgezeichnet zu bekommen. --Mbdortmund (talk) 21:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Es geht mir nicht um die Auszeichnung oder eine Anzahl es geht mir um Argumente und wenn jemand eine Meinung hat, ohne Argumente anführen zu können dann ist das unterirdisch. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Ja, und genau auf solche Beiträge bezieht sich meine Bitte. --Mbdortmund (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Das Problem ist wohl eher, dass ich viel zu lange Benutzer ernst nehme. Nachdem der der offensichtlich nur mäßig kompetente Benutzer auf dezidierte Nachfragen nur schulterzuckend und begründungsfrei das Recht auf eine eigene Meinung in Anspruch nimmt, ist mir erst klar geworden, dass Diskussionen hier vergebene Liebesmühle sind. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Insgesamt gibt es aber auch eine Menge guter Leute im QI-Bereich, die kompetent zusammenarbeiten und nützliche Bilder in großer Zahl produzieren. Die wenigen, die mit Kommentaren und Aktionen übers Ziel hinaus schießen, werden sehr weitgehend ignoriert und verlieren schnell das Interesse, wenn die Konflikte ausbleiben. Die Karawane zieht weiter. Bisher sind wir dadurch fast völlig ohne Adminansprachen zurechtgekommen. --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Möge dies auch weiterhin so bleiben. Ich gehe davon aus, dass die erneute Einfügung der überflüssigen Bildnotiz durch Lmbuga, diesmal angereichert mit einem persönlichen Kommentar gegen mich, anderweitig entfernt wird. --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Kannst Du Dich dazu durchringen, das einfach stehen zu lassen? Wenn Du willst, bitte ich auch ihn, weitere Eskalation zu vermeiden. Dein harter Kommentar steht ja auch da. Oder ich entferne die gesamte Kommentarschiene, wenn es sein muss. Ich schreibe jetzt auch dort ein kurze Bitte um Deeskalation. --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:09, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Wo liest Du einen harten Kommentar? Die Bitte, persönliche Begutachtungen aus fremden Bildern in Zukunft sein zu lassen? Insbesondere wenn sie sinnsuchend sind? --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

"your acquaintance in photographie is nearly 0" --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Nicht aufregen auf FPC haben wir mit Alvesgespar und Steven Walling noch viel schlimmere Kaliber, die es nicht einmal merken, was sie da für einen Stuss von sich geben. Aber Vetternwirtschaft betreiben können sie umso besser. --Niabot (talk) 23:19, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Mbdortmund: was du als harten Kommentar bezeichnest ist das Extrakt aus Widersprüchen, die Lmbuga selbst hervorruft indem er einerseits ein Bild wegen angeblich zu starker und unnatürlicher Verzerrung (er will das ja nicht konkretisieren) ablehnt, dann aber ein anderes (File:Lörrach_-_Museum_am_Burghof.jpg) welches nicht minder verzerrt ist zu promoten. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Brasilia TV Tower

Hi Wladi,

auf dem Fotoworkshop hatten wir ja mal ganz kurz über dem Fernsehturm in Brasilia gesprochen, wobei ich erwähnt hatte, dass ich es ziemlich witzig fand. Das hatte ich damals im Sinn. Es war diese komplette Nacktheit. Es war wie ein Körper ohne Haut und Fleisch, nur Skelett und Nerven. Sorry habe mich nach so lange Zeit erst wieder gemeldet, hatte fast komplett vergessen.--Wing (talk) 06:03, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Ja, der alte Fernsehturm von Brasília rangiert bei mir persönlich so ziemlich in den hintersten Rängen was Ästhetik angeht. Trotzdem hat er gewisse einzigartige Züge. Der neue Fernsehturm von Brasília, den übrigens der über 100-jährige Niemeyer entworfen hat, zeigt da komplett andere Formen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inlingen - Wasserschloss2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 15:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inlingen - Wasserschloss3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great! --AleXXw 16:56, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peugeot Kuelerfigur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Jebulon 10:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Comment

Hi Taxiarchos228, hope you are having a good day.

Two things:

1. I'm impressed by how fast you put my picture on en:Regis Labeaume, good work!
2. Regarding pictures in QIC, I know perspective and tilt correction is easy to correct and this is why I opposed to this picture. Let me explain. You post dozens of pictures on QIC, which is great by the way, and reviewing these pictures takes time. If things you can easily correct by yourself are not done, I don't see why we should promote these pictures. If those things were done in the first place, you would get faster reviews because we would know that you took the time to make your pictures to the level before presenting them. In the end, what am I saying? You shouldn't anwser me it is easy to correct when I review your picture, you should do it in the first place so I can support it! I hope you don't get this as an insult but like an explanation of my vote. It is sometimes hard for me to explain in a right way when I write in English and I always fear I'm not well understood (I'm a French speaker from Quebec City).

Hope to see your beautiful work again, Letartean (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Letartean,

we have obviously different evaluation standards for QI. But no problem: we don't have to be the same opinion about that and I feel also not offended. Greetings to Canada --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: Quebec is a great city. I was two times there and I have lots of pictures from this beautiful city I have not uploaded it yet. But I hope I will have time for that this year.

Well, maybe we have different opinions but in the end, are your pictures getting promoted as they should? I think they don't just because of that. See the evaluations for this one or this one or this one and many more of yours are declined because of this problem. And, as you said, "it is easily fixable". In the end, I'm just saying that you take good pictures and a little more work on them would get a lot more of them promoted. Just tought it could help you to know. If not, then to bad! Have a nice day! Letartean (talk) 21:56, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Real distortion is never a problem. A falsely corrected distortion is a problem. But some guys will never learn how the world looks from inside her own dreamworld. --Niabot (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Rechberg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 04:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - St Lawrence Market.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 perspective distortion and shadows are almost too strong, but I think the colours and composition are good enough to compensate. I like the cloud coming out of the chimney, BTW. --Avenue 14:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Impression.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting... Please add geotag. --Cayambe 19:35, 11 April 2011 (UTC) geotag added --Taxiarchos228 19:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum - Detail3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 19:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Niabot 09:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Rathaus4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Niabot 09:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Josefskirche - Chorseite.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for QI --Niabot 09:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Josefskirche - Marienaltar.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 little bit of noise, but good otherwise --Niabot 09:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Amtsgericht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think it is OK for QI.--MrPanyGoff 06:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Wohnanlage Stadion2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 sharp and otherwise also good. --Cayambe 20:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Duale Hochschule BW - Lörrach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Perhaps can be more sharp, but good--Lmbuga 00:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ON - Algonquin Provincial Park - Blüte.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, for me QI. --Alchemist-hp 20:19, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Wasserkraftwerk - Kran2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --David Perez 07:03, 13 April 2011 (UTC))

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NB - Confederation Bridge6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 14:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NB - Tans-Canada-Highway.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good and interesting --Carschten 14:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Christuskirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Email

E-Mail an diesen Benutzer ist nun wieder (unter neuer sehr origineller) Adresse aktiviert (hatte es auf commons nach der Auszeit einfach vergessen). Danke für die Erinnerung. gruss Rauenstein (talk) 10:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Locarno - Madonna del Sasso.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 12:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Quebec - QC - Blick auf die Altstadt2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments also very nice, but seems ccw tilted to me, too --Carschten 12:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC) Woran machst Du das fest? --Mbdortmund 13:14, 14 April 2011 (UTC)  Support ich hatte mir das Ende des Tals (den dortigen Horizont) angeschaut, aber stimmt: alle Gebäudelinien sehen alle gerade aus. Sorry --Carschten 15:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - ROM1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments some noise and overexposure, but QI imo --Carschten 12:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Museum am Burghof.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 to me--Lmbuga 18:44, 12 April 2011 (UTC) I wonder why, the roof is also distorted --Taxiarchos228 07:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Adventgemeinde3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 20:03, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Inzlingen - Katholische Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 06:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Ontariosee.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 nice but a little bit ccw tilted --Carschten 12:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC) ausgerichtet --Taxiarchos228 10:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)  Support --Carschten 13:19, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NS - Boot.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments and also ccw tilted --Carschten 12:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC) ausgerichtet --Taxiarchos228 10:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)  Support --Carschten 13:19, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Chrischona - Fernsehturm (Nordsicht).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 06:37, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hauingen - Hauinger Trog.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Coyau 08:18, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

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

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Kennst Du das schon?

Skyline Toranto Grüße, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Vielleicht doch auf Handyfotos umsteigen? *wegduck* Rauenstein (talk) 01:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Nein, kannte ich noch nicht. Allerdings ist es ja fast richtig lizenziert. Das Bild habe ich auch bei mir zu Hause hängen, allerdings professionell auf Aluminiumleinwand reproduziert und nicht mit dem Tintenstrahldrucker ausgedruckt. Der Mensch dürfte, falls er überhaupt davon Exemplare verkauft, mit 5,99 Pfund nicht sehr viel Gewinn damit erzielen ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rolly Royce Kühlerfigur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice --Chmee2 08:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tadoussac - QC - Presbyterianische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments a bit noisy, but I like it --Carschten 09:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wieslet - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 09:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Evangelische Kirche Märkt2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice --Carschten 09:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wyhlen - Georgskirche15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 08:27, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Quebec - QC - St. Patrick Pub.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Carschten 09:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC) The upper left corner of the brown building is too high for me. But this distortion is acceptable. --Archaeodontosaurus 17:01, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schallbach - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Archaeodontosaurus 16:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - Landhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 little blurry on the far right, but overall very good and beautiful colors.--Ankara 16:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Adventgemeinde1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Roetteln Pano 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Slfi 09:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Sacré-Cœur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Beautiful colors, but please geotag. --King of Hearts 07:08, 21 April 2011 (UTC) added geotag --Taxiarchos228 07:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC) Good. --King of Hearts 19:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zeichen 310 - Ortstafel Brombach, Stadt Lörrach, 2009.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 subject isn't that exciting... but it's useful and the quality is ok. --Cayambe 19:09, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - St. Ursen von Deckenfresko2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 19:13, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - St. Ursen - Kuppel von oben.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments interesting --Carschten 16:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mulhouse - Town hall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Jebulon 17:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dreilaenderbruecke005.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting view and good image quality -- MJJR 21:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kathedrale Bourges Chor.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Gut. Sky is not always standard-blue. No detail lost near the white part.--Jebulon 16:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daimler Reitwagen.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments not perfectly sharp but good--Jebulon 16:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Tulpenparade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Clearly tilted. Easy to fix.--Ankara 16:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC) done--Taxiarchos228 16:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Good now.--Ankara 16:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jens Voigt Deutschlandtour 2006.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Ankara 09:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mulhouse - Église Saint-Fridolin2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 08:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting perspective. --Jovianeye 05:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brombach - Kriegerdenkmal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Jebulon 09:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ottawa - ON - Parlamentsgebäude (Centre Block).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Need perspective correction --Chmee2 13:07, 18 April 2011 (UTC) done--Taxiarchos228 16:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus 13:21, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting perspective. --Cayambe 09:21, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Westansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 16:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC) Info there is a dust un the sky who need to be delete beafore pormotion --Croucrou 21:45, 23 April 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 12:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - St. Ursen - Statuen - Westfassade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Coyau 20:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the coordinates on the cruise ship, but I'm not sure it's correct to just add 0 minutes and 0 seconds, because that will give an exact spot and I don't know the exact location for the boat, just a wider area. Perhaps I can contact the shipowners, but I'm not sure they know the exact timetable either. --V-wolf (talk) 12:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Without an exact spot the location can not be given by the coordinates. The syntax of the coordinates demands to have one. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Stitchinggesuch

Gerader Pfeiler?

Hallo Wlady, ich habe ein Stitching fertig, es lädt gerade hoch. Ich habe noch keine Lizenz/Freigabe eingefügt, darf ich ja nicht, Du bist schließlich der Fotograf. Grüße, Grand-Duc 20:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hier ist die Datei auch schon. Das zusammenzwängen und geradebiegen der Pfeiler erschien mir leicht, ein paar manuell gesetzte Kontrollpunkte an den kastenartigen Auswüchsen des Pfeilers gesetzt vermied schon mal die Stufe, dann noch einige Punkte im Modus horizontale und vertikale Linie, schon stand der Pfeiler gerade - horizontale Linie deshalb, weil mein Hugin aus irgend einem Grund vertikale Stitchings nicht mag und komische Projektionen und unbrauchbare Ergebnisse ausgibt, füttert man das Programm mit denselben aber um 90° gedrehten Bildern, so funktioniert alles einwandfrei. Grüße, Grand-Duc 20:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Das habe ich auch schon gemerkt, dass mein PT-Gui vertikale Stitchings nicht so mag. Die Idee es zu drehen ist gut, funktioniert aber glaube ich auch nicht immer. Es bleibt eben immer ein Probieren. Danke jedenfalls, mit dem Ergebnis bin ich zufrieden. Die Lizenz hättest Du übrigens ja doch anfügen können, ich habe das eine Bild ja bereits lizenziert, aber ich habe es jetzt nachgetragen. Grüße --Wladyslaw 06:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Bis jetzt hatte ich noch nie Probleme bei gedrehten Bildern, Vorgang, für den ich immer Irfanview und die Option "verlustfreie JPEG-Operationen" benutze. Es freut mich, dass ich dir was Brauchbares anbieten konnte. :-) Die Lizenz hätte ich übrigens auf keinen Fall hinzufügen können - das EXIF-Quellbild war zwar frei lizenziert, aber das obere Ergänzungsstück nicht, somit ist das Stitching de jure bis zu deiner Lizenzierung ein derivative work aus einer freien und einer unfreien Quelle gewesen und es wäre für mich ohne Erlaubnis (hatte vergessen zu fragen was ich bei Bearbeitungsbitten oft mache ^^ - wenn ich ansonsten jemandem um eine Bildbearbeitung mit nicht auf WP veröffentlichtem Rohmaterial bitte, schreibe ich idR dazu, ob ein Ergebnis gleich hochgeladen werden kann) nicht statthaft gewesen, einfach anzunehmen, dass die Lizenz bei der EXIF-Quelle übernommen werden darf. Ich denke sogar, dass man als Bearbeiter nicht mal im folgenden Fall die Lizenz dranbappen darf: ein Fotograf lädt ein JPEG-Bild hoch und ist mit seiner RAW-Entwicklung nicht zufrieden, weswegen er an Interessenten sein RAW herausgibt. Wenn diese Interessenten dann ein JPEG aus dem Bild erzeugt haben, sehe ich das trotzdem als ein anderes Werk an als das bereits auf WP hochgeladene Bild, weil man aus dem einen JPEG nicht das andere JPEG erhalten kann. Somit darf der Bearbeiter nicht ohne Erlaubnis die Lizenz der Fotografenversion übernehmen, weil es zwei unterschiedliche Werke sind, selbst wenn sie gleich aussehen - der RAW-Entwickler selber dürfte übrigens wohl meistens nur handwerkliche urheberrechtlich nicht schützbare Leistungen erbringen. Es ist es auf jeden Fall sehr ratsam, einfach vorsichtig zu sein und besser lieber einmal zu viel nachzufragen. :-) Grand-Duc 15:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tadoussac - QC - Presbyterianische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --AngMoKio 07:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gatineau - QC - Museum of Civilisation4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --AngMoKio 14:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bad Mitterndorf - Friedhof an der Pfarrkirche St. Margareta.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 17:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fischingen - Evangelische Kirche8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 18:28, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scheinwerfer Maybach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Burg Roetteln Innenhof.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Need perspective correction IMO.--Ankara 16:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC) done--Taxiarchos228 16:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Right part still tilted IMO. --Ankara 16:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Good after new correction Jovianeye 19:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flagge Kanadas.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ich hätte mir etwas Bewegungsunschärfe gewünscht, ich weiß, damit stehe ich ziemlich alleine ;) --Ralf Roletschek 10:42, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schöne Dynamik, schönes Licht --Ralf Roletschek 10:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tadoussac - QC - Tourismusbüro.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 15:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tadoussac - QC - Hotel Tadoussac2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 sharp and good. --Cayambe 03:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments like it - good quality and composition --LuFiLa 12:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments like it - good quality and composition --LuFiLa 12:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sportfotograf.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --King of Hearts 22:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chur - GR - GKB.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice --Sfu 21:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Gare du Nord.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Sfu 21:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto Skyline4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Schlaier 08:41, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peggys Cove - NS - Gesamtansicht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 12:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peggys Cove - NS - Leuchturm3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Berthold Werner 15:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peggys Cove - NS - Leuchturm bei Sonnenuntergang.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Info beautiful but there is 3 dust that need to be delete before promotion --Croucrou 11:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC) I hope that I have them removed, was hard for me to catch them --Taxiarchos228 11:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NB - Hopewell Rocks1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ximonic 19:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Quality image. --Ximonic 20:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Arbeitsgericht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 birds are not so sharp but otherwise it is good enough IMO.--Ximonic 20:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mobiles Postamt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 20:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brockville - ON - First Presbyterian Church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments it's perspective distorted and the brance is bad, but for that motive it's okay --Carschten 20:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pauluskirche in Bern (Detail).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 20:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mulhouse - Hauptbahnhof.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 16:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dreilaenderbruecke 2-img-stitch GD.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments interesting --Mbdortmund 15:28, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mercedes Benz W116 (ami version).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jovianeye 04:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Wohnanlage Stadion5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I like the composition very much! QI --Schlaier 15:32, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Lüneburg Handwerkskammer Nachtaufnahme

Mein Bild bei QI wird als "schief" bemängelt. Aber ich mag das nicht glauben. Wir standen ja nun quasi nebeneinander bei der Aufnhme, die Fenster links und rechts haben die gleiche Neigung. Ich habe das Stativ nach Wasserwaage ausgerichtet. Dort "Am Sande" ist doch alles irgendwie schief? Ich möchte da jetzt kein Veto von dir sondern dein Meinung. Gruß Ralf Roletschek (talk) 19:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Habe mich bei QI geäußert, außerdem auch hier noch etwas ausführlicher. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Danke! Ohne das zu kennen, habe ich eben ähnliches geschrieben. Ich mache dieses erbarmungslose Verzerren nicht mit. Ein bißchen, ok, aber nicht immer. Die gnadenlos gerade gezerrten Aufnahmen sind doch falsch. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 06:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Rümmingen - Evangelische_Kirche 3

Ich habe in File:Rümmingen - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg eine Annotation an der Stelle, die ich als "scan error" bezeichnet habe, eingefügt. Der Ausdruck ist auch nicht wirklich fachgerecht. Es sieht für mich an der Stelle so aus, als hätte eine Scanner das Bild beim Einlesen minimal verschoben, sodass hier Zeilen doppelt sind oder leicht verschoben sind gegenüber den darüber und darunter liegenden Zeilen. Es ergibt sich eine Unschärfe und ein leichter Knick an den Kanten auf der gekennzeichneten Höhe. --Elektroschreiber (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, jetzt weiß ich was Du meinst. Es handelt sich hierbei um Stitchingfehler, da das Bild aus mehreren Einzelbildern zusammengesetzt wurde. Das lässt sich grundsätzlich leicht beheben. Danke für den Hinweis. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alma - NB - Harbour(edit).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments tolle Farben & Stimmung --Ralf Roletschek 17:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Loerracher Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 20:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Justizvollzugsanstalt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, in spite of the (unavoidable, IMO) shadow.--Jebulon 16:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Evangelische Stadtkirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Basvb 16:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Grüttsee.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Please add geotag. --Cayambe 15:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 08:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NS - School bus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 ccw tilted --Carschten 20:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC) this picture is not tilted --Taxiarchos228 13:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)If I'm not wrong, we have an horizontal line behind the trees left: no tilt then. QI furthermore--Jebulon 15:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Nordostansicht-2010-08-09.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 Nicely framed, good quality. --ElHeineken 19:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Auditorio de Tenerife Pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and impressiv building --Badener 14:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done. A.Savin 15:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

QI

Hey. Thanks for the review. But can you please tell me what does "CA" mean? :) Tomer T (talk) 12:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

CA = Chromatic aberration --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Kannst du mal zwei Fotos von mir anschauen?

Ich habe gemerkt, dass du immer sehr schöne Fotos machst und habe deshalb eine Bitte. Kannst du vielleicht mal einen Blick auf meine beiden Grabsteinbilder bei der QI werfen? Nicht dass du mich falsch verstehst: Ich will dich nicht überreden sie zu promoten, aber ein Review wäre schön, damit ich etwas lerne. --LuFiLa (talk) 11:04, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Mit offener Blende zu fotografieren, wie Du es gemacht hast, ist grundsätzlich dann gut wenn ein Objekt eindeutig im Vordergrund scharf erscheinen soll und alle anderen schön unscharf erscheinen sollen. Bei diesem Motiv bin ich mir aber nicht sicher ob ein Grabstein von der Anordnung als eindeutig im Vordergrund hervor sticht, sieht für mich eigentlich nicht so aus. Und in so einem Fall würde ich mit Blende 8 bis 11 fotografieren, damit alles schön scharf dargestellt werden soll. Leider mangelt es aber dem Bild generell (auch beim vorderen Grabstein) an Schärfe. Ich habe das mal nicht in die QCI geschrieben weil es dort ein wenig den Rahmen sprengen würde. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:10, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die ausführliche Rückmeldung. Bis jetzt habe ich immer mit der Automatik fotografiert. Das ist wohl ein Fehler :(. --LuFiLa (talk) 07:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Die Einflussmöglichkeiten sind einfach ungleich geringer und normalerweise leidet bei den voll- oder halbautomatischen Modi auch die Schärfeleistung. Das Fotografieren im (voll) manuellen Modus (M) ist aber nicht sonderlich schwierig. Einfach die ISO-Zahl einstellen (so klein wie möglich, so groß wie nötig, bei einem schattigen Friedhof würde ich mit ISO-Zahlen zwischen 250 und 400 operieren), dann die Blende einstellen je nach dem ob Du Tiefenschärfe haben willst (8 bis 11) oder nicht (2,8 oder so klein wie es das Objektiv zulässt) und dann mittels dem in der Kamera integrierten Belichtungsmesser die korrekte Belichtungszeit einstellen. Es sind nur die drei Parameter. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:41, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breisacher Munster Orgel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 noisy I'm afraid.--Jebulon 09:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)Not perfect especially above (sharpness), but far much better after denoising, thank you. QI now, IMO.--Jebulon 20:49, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke9.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke9.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm und Marsfeld3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great picture --Schlaier 19:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Stetten - Winterpanorama.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks washed out but then I realized it's winter. OK. --King of Hearts 19:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Christuskirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Einwandfrei. --Berthold Werner 14:33, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Great picture! --Schlaier 19:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Benediktinerkloster St. Johann.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 18:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wittlingen - St. Michael.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 13:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Breisacher Munster Hochaltar (Detail).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 10:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Badener 10:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

litter, purge cache

OK, you were right. Much better now.--Jebulon (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Altes Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 07:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Hebelhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Cayambe 07:31, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 19:52, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 09:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 19:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 19:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Santa Maria Val Muestair.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Maybe a little perspective correction left ?--Jebulon 12:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC) should be better now --Taxiarchos228 19:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC) Atleast in my opinion, it is a quality image now. Yet I have to say, I can see some chromatic aberrations at the left. Maybe one could desaturate those? --Ximonic 15:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wyhlen - Friedenskirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 09:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Lörrach-St. Peter - Nordostansicht-2010-08-09.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lörrach-St. Peter - Nordostansicht-2010-08-09.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 12:59, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto Harbourfront.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schau an, ein Türmchen :) --Ralf Roletschek 10:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC) also ich sehe keines, höhö :) --Taxiarchos228 11:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 13:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Rogers Centre - Michael Snow Skulptur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good as QI (if no copyright)--Jebulon 15:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nicely done. --King of Hearts 08:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nicely done. --King of Hearts 08:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Johanneskirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ugly and disturbing newspaper on the ground. Crop out ?--Jebulon 13:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC) better now? --Taxiarchos228 19:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC) Yes, better. QI--Jebulon 10:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke10.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke10.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Röttler Kirche.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Schlaier 16:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herten - St. Josef - Hochaltar.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit soft maybe (denoising ?), and crop tight above, but QI nevertheless.--Jebulon 17:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and useful.--Ankara 12:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Ankara 13:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Hart House.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Beinahe hätte ich übersehen, dass der Himmel stark verrauscht ist, das kannst du ja korrigieren. --Berthold Werner 17:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC) jupp, ist entrauscht --Taxiarchos228 16:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC) Good now. --Berthold Werner 20:18, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Johannis Lüneburg1a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments schief! --Ralf Roletschek 09:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GR - Steinkirche Cazis.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 könntest Du die Skulptur noch kategorisieren --Mbdortmund 16:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Fachwerkhaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Richard Bartz 17:21, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panorama basel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 14:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hausen im Wiesental

Hallo Wladyslaw! Mir ist gerade erst aufgefallen, dass wir eine kleine Diskrepanz in der Anzahl der Gefallenen und Vermissten im Ersten Weltkrieg haben: Du schreibst im Abschnitt Bevölkerung von 43 Gefallenen und fünf Vermissten, meine Quellen (in dem Fall die Ortschronik von 1937) sprechen von 40 Gefallenen und sechs Vermissten (siehe Geschichts-Abschnitt). Hast du zufällig eine Quellenangabe für deine Zahlen? Viele Grüße,--SEM (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo SEM,

die verwendete Quelle, von der ich die Zahlen habe steht im Abschnitt. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Hm, diese Diskrepanz ist merwürdig. Die Zahlen für den 2. Weltkrieg unterscheiden sich nur um eins, und da würde ich ein Verzählen meinerseits nicht ausschließen ;) Aber für den Ersten Weltkrieg steht in der 1937er-Chronik explizit von den 46 Gefallenen. Und gerade so "frisch" nach dem 1. WK sollte die Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit da doch eigentlich recht gering sein. Ich werde aber die 1937er Zahlen auch nochmal mit denen der 1985er Chronik vergleichen. Grüße,-SEM (talk) 21:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Wladyslaw! Ich habe vor kurzem das Buch über den Landkreis Lörrach erstanden und konnte deswegen den Abschnitt "Religion" ein wenig ausbauen. Entspricht das ungefähr deinen Vorstellungen, oder hast du noch mehr Infos, die sich ggfs. einbauen ließen? Falls nein würde ich den Artikel nämlich bald kandidieren lassen, er ist ja nun shcon 6 Wochen im Review und es tut sich nicht mehr viel. Viele Grüsse,--SEM (talk) 22:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo SEM, ich finde den Artikel ganz gut gelungen. Was mir immer noch nicht gefällt und sofern ich die Zeit finde versuche ich das noch einzuarbeiten: eine Kurzbeschreibung der beiden Kirchenbauwerke fehlt noch völlig (im Abschnitt Ortsbild und Bauwerke). Ansonsten finde ich ihn gut gelungen. Für "lesenswert" sollte er es m.E. schon reichen, bei exzellenten Artikel wünschen sich viele doch noch detailliertere Beschreibungen. Zum Beispiel ist der Abschnitt über die Städtepartnerschaften recht kurz. Man könnte noch recherchieren seit wann die besteht und in welcher Form die Pflege stattfindet. Grüße zurück --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Wladylsaw, danke für die Rückmeldung. Ich habe über die Partnerschaften etwas eingefügt. Ein Abschnitt über die Kirchen von dir wäre natürlich noch super! Grüße,--SEM (talk) 10:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Was mir auch noch einfällt: vielleicht sollte der Großbrand bei der Firma brennet auch erwähnt werden. Schließlich könnte das sogar Auswirkungen auf Arbeitsplätze oder die Wirtschaft im Ort haben. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hatte ich auch schon überlegt; das Problem ist halt, dass die Folgen sich derzeit wohl noch nicht wirklich abschätzen lassen und ich deswegen befürchte, dass mir das quasi als Theoriefindung ausgelegt wird. Ich denke, ich werde erst einmal abwarten. Sollte es Auswirkungen haben (was ich natürlich nicht hoffe), lässt es sich ja später mit besserem "Überblick" immer noch einbauen. --SEM (talk) 13:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Biel Gate

Hello Wladyslaw.

I was just kidding, cause I know this place.

Es war nur ein Wortspiel. Biel Gate = Bill Gates= Microsoft.

Ok, I'm sorry...

Someone was missing something...

My bad...--Jebulon (talk) 17:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I have already unterstood it, but some other users may ask if this is not only a joke an I wanted to explain it :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! GR - Steinkirche Cazis2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Please geotag. --Cayambe 18:38, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:On the edge - free world version.jpg

Hey, the discussion is closed as keep, so there's no reason to continue voting. Thanks! Steven Walling 19:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Did not see it. Thank you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:08, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Schlaier 07:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Schlaier 07:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochrheinbrücke(ws).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Two spots easy to remove (see note) --Archaeodontosaurus 16:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weiherschloss Bottmingen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Raghith 18:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)  Comment hier ist aber wirklich eine Korrektur der stürzenden Linien angebracht. Sollte aber wohl kein Problem darstellen. --Carschten 18:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berner Muenster mit Plattform und Aare.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 but two spots easy to remove like Hochrheinbrücke --Archaeodontosaurus 16:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bieltor Solothurn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice name... Sponsorized my Microsoft ?--Jebulon 15:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC) this Gate is named after a swiss city named Biel (in french: Bienne) --Taxiarchos228 15:36, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - St. Ursen von Osten.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 to me.--Jebulon 15:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Solothurn - St. Ursen - Kuppel (Vierung).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Interesting photo! --Vizu 15:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Harrison49 12:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:Freedom Church (Weil am Rhein)

Hallo, warum wurde die Cat. Freedom Church genannt, wo es um die Friedenskirche geht? Selbst, wenn es stimmen sollte, muss hier der Eigenname nicht übersetzt werden. Gruß. --Schiwago (talk) 07:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Schiwago, es hat sich hier scheinbar durchgesetzt die Kategorien möglichst englisch zu bezeichnen und Feedom Church ist nun mal die Übersetzung von Friedenskirche. Gruß zurück --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Sicher? War mir (und anderen) bisher unbekannt. Church of peace wäre meine Bauchentscheidung gewesen. Ich gebe aber zu, nicht alles zu wissen und gern hinzuzulernen;) Zu den Cats: wie man beispielsweise hier sehen kann, wurden die Cats aller Kirchen mit einem Eigennamen nicht übersetzt - frage nicht, wo das steht, ich bin zu faul zu suchen. Ich erinnere mich dunkel an seitenlange Diskussionen dazu;) Vielleicht kannst du das ja noch einmal überprüfen und es stellt sich heraus, dass wir hier im Norden wieder mal 50 Jahre zu spät dran sind (Otto von Bismarck). Gruß. --Schiwago (talk) 07:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Das mit den Kategorien wird hier bei Commons leider nicht einheitlich gehandhabt. Church of Peace erscheint mir auch die angemessenere Übersetzung zu sein. Wenn Du willst kannst Du es gerne verschieben. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:54, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Done, in Category:Churches of Peace in Germany ist man sich mit der Nicht-Übersetzung ziemlich einig gewesen, so habe ich es jetzt auch gemacht. Danke für dein feedback und Gruß. --Schiwago (talk) 10:17, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Danke fürs Verschieben; ich habe das "filemove-Recht" noch nicht, habe Deine Anfrage aber zum Anlass genommen, es zu beantragen. Übrigens: hübsche Bilder fertigst Du an. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Verschoben habe ich nichts, neue Cat angelegt, umkategorisiert und speedydelete auf die alte Cat. Danke für die Blumen, die ich gern zurückgebe. Die HDR-Technik begeistert mich immer wieder - weniger die künstlerischen Aspekte als die praktischen. Ich bin ja, wie du vielleicht gesehen hast, oft mit Motiven beschäftigt, die durch große Lichtunterschiede schwierig sind. Wenn man aber einmal auf Tour ist, kann man selten lange Wartezeiten oder spezielle Tourplanungen nach den Lichtverhältnissen vornehmen. So fiel die Wahl beim letzten Kamerakauf auf eine, die diese Technik bereits programmiert hat. Die HDR-Funktion musste schon oft genutzt werden. Da ich ungern schwere Technik mit mir herumschleppe, habe ich bewusst eine "Immer-dabei-Größe" gewählt und muss gegenüber einer DSR natürlich Einschränkungen in Kauf nehmen. Ich bin aber mit dem Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis durchaus zufrieden. Viele Grüße. --Schiwago (talk) 07:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Interessant. Ich setzte die Technik auch allergrößtenteils nur aus praktischen Gründen ein. Falls Du wissen magst, wie ich meine Bilder "bastle": hier User:Taxiarchos228/HDR ist im Laufe der letzten Jahre der Versuch einer kleinen (eigentlich immer noch nicht vollständigen) Anleitung entstanden. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:28, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Vitra Haus3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 16:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

HDR

I see you reviewed HDR image and I would like to hear an advice from yours. Maybe you understand this technology and may advice me a practical manual or a useful article about HDR? I'd like to make some HDR images myself. Or maybe it's not a good idea & you may show me the reason to avoid it? Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

I have written a little guidance here de:Benutzer:S1/HDR-Anleitung_und_FAQ , but it is all in german. Maybe you look there first and if you have any questions or don't understand it I can translate it to you. I am using a program called tufuse. Sorry for this short answer, next time a will write a bit more in detail. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Guidance now also available here at Commons: User:Taxiarchos228/HDR, an English version is presently under develop. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the links.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. To translate is the best way to read and understand :-))).--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

OK Translation done!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Cannot understand this idea: «Blend across -180/+180 boundary (left/right edge of image). Use with 360 degree images where left and right edges of image are continuous». Maybe you can tell me more details? Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for translating it. The option -w you only need for 360° panoramas. If you have such a HDR you have to tell this tufuse in order that the boundarys fit together. But I have never made a 360° panorama until yet. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

File:'The March of Millions' - It's in our hands.png

Edit of 'The March of Millions' - It's in our hands.png

I was wondering if you can help get the image up to wikipedia standards for good image. You pointed out that the image is "too dark", Can we fix the brightness issue? -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, look at right side. But there are other problems too (noise, Chromatic aberration) that are not to improve so easy. I try it at the evening but I guess the original picture is to bad to bring it to a quality picture standard. But nevertheless this picture is a good contemporary document. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for you help. I know the cameras that were used during the revolution by most of the protesters kinda suck; problem is most of the photos cannot be retaken so I feel that have to try to improve them. Problem is, I suck at using paint or any other graphic application so I am going 2 need all help I can get. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 12:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Germanuskirche - Heidenköpfle.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice detail, good exposure --Saffron Blaze 08:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Germanuskirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 all round --Saffron Blaze 08:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Fridolin - Chor mit Altar.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 08:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice and sharp --Saffron Blaze 08:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--PereslavlFoto 18:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Galluskirche - Glasfenster.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments What noise reduction was applied to this photo?--PereslavlFoto 18:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC) no one, is this necessary here? --Taxiarchos228 19:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC) See the colour noise inflows on the bottom.--PereslavlFoto 20:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 20:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Fine now! You may try to add sharpness with unsharp mask tool, anyway :-).--PereslavlFoto 21:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC) I have --Taxiarchos228 21:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC) That's why I didn't insist! :-) --PereslavlFoto 21:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Galluskirche - Langhaus mit Empore.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Oppose Colour noise, check the walls for example.--PereslavlFoto 18:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC) I have reduced the noise --Taxiarchos228 19:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Next step is to make it sharper, try "unsharp mask" filter.--PereslavlFoto 20:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 20:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC) On the one hand, I cannot oppose now, the image is fine. On the other, I am against resampling and I advice you to combine sharpness and large size. Thanks.--PereslavlFoto 21:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Johannis Lüneburg - Orgel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments As at the first attempt, I like this picture very much, but I'm worried about the colors, looking unnatural. How could I be convinced ?...--Jebulon 15:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC) Look at the other picture of this Organ (of Andreas Praefcke), nearly same view and same colours --Taxiarchos228 15:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)OK. And yours is better, IMO.--Jebulon 15:33, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - CN Tower - View from Skypod.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and interesting.--PereslavlFoto 19:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Herten - St. Josef - Langhaus2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 cannot see any problems here.--PereslavlFoto 17:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eimeldingen - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Too bad the bird isn't sharp but the structure is well captured --Saffron Blaze 17:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-Christuskirche - Glockenturm2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Perfect...even the pigeon on top is sharp. --Saffron Blaze 17:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskirche - Orgel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments This a a really wonderful picture... colour, sharpness and lighting. --Saffron Blaze 17:30, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - Galluskirche - Stiftertafel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Can't get any better without a ladder --Saffron Blaze 17:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 07:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments nice --Pudelek 13:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kleinkems - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 13:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hausen im Wiesental - Katholische Kirche12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 08:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach - St. Peter - Turm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 08:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Peter - Glockenturm3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Peter and Paul

Hi Wladislaw.

I've removed my opposition vote.

Yes I know I'm the current leader(?) in QIC (It is NOT a contest with User:Pudelek ), but I am to lazy to "feed" the category you mentioned. More than 540 QI pictures... Do you know how to do that easily ? If not, please have a look on my user page, and follow the blue links !--Jebulon (talk) 13:06, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes there is, look at: Help:Gadget-HotCat. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Wladislaw.

Wow, what a great job you did ! Thank you very much.

I've read the "hotcat" gadget page, but there is no french translation, and my english is too poor for such technical matters and I'm discouraged.

Regarding the number of my QI, I think you didn't count the current QI, already promotted but not yet categorized in my galleries in the section "last but not least" : 6 more (then, total could be 54...1 !!)

Anyway, there is probably a mistake somewhere, i'll verify this.

I'll try too feed now the category you created...

En route pour les mille ?

QIC is not a a goal for me, but a way for me to improve the quality of my job, and to be sure that I offer good images for users (useful categorization is very important too, so I re-categorize sometimes some of your pictures, like the pulpit or others...) Almost all my pictures are submitted in QIC, maybe I'll need a bot for that  ?

Warm greetings from Paris and from Jebulon (talk) 08:39, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

VI and Viburnum lantanoides

You're not familiar with the scopes of VI. In the case of plants you must write:

Viburnum lantanoides in italics (for Latin name)

Followed by the vernacular name in English: here Hobblebush.

But if your picture here is not enough because it does not show the shrub in full, you mustreduce it to flower and Leaf. At the end you must write:

''[[:Category:Viburnum lantanoides|Viburnum lantanoides]]'' Hobblebush - Flower and Leaf .

Feel free to ask if you have a question. Regards --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but there is no one who can explain me in detail what these "scopes" are. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:11, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

This is the "fields of application" of the label. I am ashamed that my bad English does not permit me to say it With easy. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I know the meaning of the word but I wonder about how to handle with the categorys for VI. In my eyes it is not meaningful to structure a cat with just five files to further sub-cats. This I have not understood by my first candidate, the CN Tower antenna. If this is so I don't want to support VI because this is a kind of absurdity. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I had the same reaction at first and I spent many months not to go back to VI. Yet it is a major label.

In this case is that of the plant, it is very difficult to give a unique label for a single photograph. Usually we give a label for "Flower and leaf" and a label for the "habitus". The two photos giving a broader view of the subject. Your picture fits perfectly with Flower and Leaf label.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

St. Nikolaus church, Huttingen in VI

Ok for this but need geocodage please. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirchen - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 16:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 16:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 16:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Efringen - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 16:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirchen - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Please add geoatg. --Cayambe 12:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kleinkems - Evangelische Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 11:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Dreiländerbrücke3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice composition. Please add geocode. --Cayambe 12:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fischingen - Evangelische Kirche6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Hausen im Wiesental - Evangelische Kirche8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kleinkems - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice. Sehr gut -- George Chernilevsky 11:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Welmlingen - Evangelische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Raghith 08:49, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Blick auf den Tüllinger Berg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Very nice shot --Schlaier 13:40, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Istein - St. Michael7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not sure about the perspective but the detail offered of this beautifully decorated interior is exceptional. --Saffron Blaze 14:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments When you consider every seat in the church had a different carving it is very informative. Good quality pic too. --Saffron Blaze 14:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto Music Garden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 09:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! NB - Hartland Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 09:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halifax - NS - Pylon der Angus L. Macdonald Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 09:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Halifax - NS - Rathaus Halifax.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 09:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Karte Kirchen im Landkreis Lörrach.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Nice work. --Saffron Blaze 23:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mappach - Evangelische Kirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. A tighter crop on the right would improve symmetry. --Saffron Blaze 10:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Peter und Paul3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto Skyline2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 The horizon (waterline) seems uneven as if edited considerably. Saffron Blaze 09:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC) the horizont is not edited, only the colors had to be adjusted, there was unfortunately no good conditions in the helicopter --Taxiarchos228 10:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Objektive und CA

Ich benutze fast auschließlich das Pentax 4.0/16-45 mm. Das ist in der Schärfe besser als das im Kit verkaufte 18-55mm aber bezüglich CA auch nicht so doll. Ich hab's bei dem Frankenthaler Bild mal versucht zu reduzieren. --Berthold Werner (talk) 12:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Best in scope but need Geocodage--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
done --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Toronto Harbourfront - Amsterdam Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 07:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brockville - ON - Büste Brock.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 07:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brockville - ON - Court House.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 07:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Elchwarnschild.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. The left justified crop might not be the best option. --Saffron Blaze 07:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Baie-Saint-Paul.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Ximonic 16:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Tim Hortons.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments This would have been perfect if it was my Jeep at the drive through:). Great coffee, great photo. --Saffron Blaze 13:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not the best light but good composition. --King of Hearts 23:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Das nenne ich interessant

User:FAP = Sockenpuppe und unangenehme Implikation: [2] -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 23:13, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment I don't see a geocode. Please see criterion #5. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:33, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• I don't think it is so important for this kind of objects than it is for buildings, but I have added the geocode --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

•  Support "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so." Geocodes may be used to access content from maps and to establish geographical relationships.[3] --Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:11, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose The scope should be reduced a "flower and leaf" as it gives only parcelaire view of the plant. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done - Shouldn't also we add the common name in English? In Wikipedia three names are given: Hobblebush, Witch-hobble, and Moosewood. Which one is most used?--MrPanyGoff 06:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

 Support Latin name in italics should be followed if there is the common name in English --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

•  Support revised scope. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Istein - St. Michael4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tomer T 09:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Istein - St. Michael6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Alupus 20:51, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Weil am Rhein - Evangelische Kirche Märkt3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eisensteg am Wasserkraftwerk Rheinfelden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Raghith 05:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wasserkraftwerk Rheinfelden (seitlich).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Raghith 05:14, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! QC - Montmorency-Fall Pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Stunning. The people on right give perspective on how large the falls is. --Saffron Blaze 13:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC) Please geocode. --Avenue 13:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kleinkems - Feuerwehr.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jovianeye 13:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Goetheanum

Wlady, dein Postfach dürfte voll sein. Ich wollte dir eine Betaversion des Stitches schicken, doch das ging nicht: "Speichervolumen überschritten". Falls Du noch wach sein solltest, ich denke, dass ich bis 2 Uhr noch am PC bin und bis dann die Mail noch mal schicken könnte. Grüße, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hast Du schon die erweiterten Felder von {{Information}} gesehen? Da gibt es den Parameter "other_fields", den ich gerne benutze, um die Aufnahmeinformationen bei Stitchings anzugeben... Das kann ganz praktisch sein, wenn man das nicht direkt oben in die Bildbeschreibung kleben möchte. LG Grand-Duc (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirchen - Evangelische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Andrei Stroe 10:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kleinkems - Evangelische Kirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Andrei Stroe 10:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Huttingen - Katholische Kirche5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tomer T 09:06, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Welmlingen - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Andrei Stroe 10:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirchen - Evangelische Kirche2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Harrison49 23:14, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Huttingen - Katholische Kirche3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Harrison49 23:14, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ötlingen - Blick auf Weil am Rhein und die Basler Bucht.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments It's good. --Tomer T 11:11, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Boring topic

Hi, regarding Commons_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#Proposed:_Commons:Featured_video_candidates#Images_not_used_in_articles - a relatively innocent question from someone used to other FPC processes. My reply was a bit blunt but I thought your followup (supporting my reply) was a wee bit aggressive! Be kind to newcomers :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 12:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that my answer was disrespectful but first the user is not really a newcomer with editing over a year right now and second I am always suspicious about users that wants roll up basic rules. Greetings --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

•  Question Rules may have changed recently that I do not know of, but what is the relevance of this church? Church scopes used to be only acceptable for renowned buildings or cathedrals, etc. Hans 07:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Why should this church be not relevant? In de.wikipedia (which has very tight relevant criteria) this church could get an own article - and will get soon. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Per scopes for buildings: Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope. Cathedral scopes are OK, but for other churches there should be a good reason, like being a pilgrimage place, being really famous, being architecturally exceptional... Christian architecture is taken as an example, but the same general rule applies to religious buildings of any religion. Hans 07:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
      • This rule is neither comprehensible nor logical. Why are only churches restricted? Why are e.g. all flowers and arthropod relevant? --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:51, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
        • In the above mentioned rule I believe the religious buildings are used just as an example as being probably the most photographed subject. So this should be applied to all subjects for instance: Not any footballer is worth a Valued Image scope.... As if till now it was applied only to churches. In my view, the interpretation of this rule should be broaden (but still not any). I think that if the temple has some presentable architecture this is enough. In this connection I find the subject of the nominated photo OK for VI. So I  Support too.--MrPanyGoff 12:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 20:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dultenaugrabenbrücke1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 09:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernsehturm Stuttgart.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 09:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pantomime.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tomer T 10:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Cayambe 07:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Egringen - Evangelische Kirche17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 19:22, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mappach - Evangelische Kirche7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 12:57, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kalkwerk Istein.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Insufficient quality. (resolution) --Saffron Blaze 14:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1.992 × 1.104 Pixel is curtly more than 2 MP --Taxiarchos228 14:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC) I just looked at the file size. Saffron Blaze 14:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Michael Rheinfelden-Karsau2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tomer T 19:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wyhlen - Georgskirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Blown highlights from the window, but overall quality is good. --Tomer T 19:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Staufen - Rathaus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 23:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fridolinsmuenster Bad Saeckingen Immaculata.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 23:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toronto - ON - Direct Energy Centre.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Decent. --Mattbuck 16:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Kaffee auf.

Wenn diese Hexenjagd gegen bestimmte Bildautoren so weitergeht, pappe ich an alle meine Bilder auch sonne Formulierung dran und stelle eigenhändig 3000+ Löschanträge. -- smial (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Das würde ich dem speziellen Fall nicht sonderlich überbewerten; wirkt das bisherige Verhalten des Benutzers sowie sein LA äußerst unbeholfen und dilettantisch. Aber generell finde ich den derzeitigen Bildersturm auf Penisbilder, Bilder schlechter Qualität und "Kunst"-Bilder auch recht bedenklich. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

+1. Und das Gelabere um angeblichen out of scope, no educational use pp. - oft mit dem Hintergrund: Kenn ich nicht, ist also nix! - nicht zu vergessen. Guckt man sich die Benutzerbeiträge mancher dieser löschantragsfreudiger Commons-User an, findet man oft genug weniger als eine handvoll hochgeladene eigene Werke. Ich verstehe die Motivation dieser Leute nicht. Hier ist jeder File doch für sich abgeschlossen. In 'nem Artikel kann man sich ja noch um weltanschauliche oder fachliche Auffassungen kloppen - hier brauch ich mich doch nur zum nächsten Bild zu klicken. --Alupus (talk) 20:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Composition rules for QI

Nicht jede Zentralansicht ...

... muss zwingend in einen Golden Schnitt verwandelt werden!

Hello Wladyslaw, I'm not nearly as long here at wikipedia and wikimedia commons as you are. And you have made animpressive amount of pictures (many quality images and featured pictures). And I do not understand why do you think that "an acceptable composition is when an object is showed clearly within the bounds of possibility." When I read the candidates page ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:QIC ) and the image guidelines ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:I ) I find the following:

"These are the guidelines [...] for new quality images. Quality image candidates should meet all of the following requirements [...] Above all, be polite. The image you are judging is somebody's work. [...] and remember… rules can be broken. [...]

Issue: Composition / Common Problems: Unbalanced composition / Discussion: [...] The Golden Ratio and Rule of Thirds are common guidelines for composition that have been inherited from painting. Centering the subject is often considered a negative practice. [...] The main idea here is NOT to center the subject without a very good reason." --Elektroschreiber (talk) 07:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Elektroschreiber,

auch wenn auf Commons Englisch die Verkehrssprache ist brauchen wir uns auf der Diskussionsseite nicht zwingend so zu unterhalten ;-) Zu Deiner Bemerkung bezüglich der Bildkomposition. Natürlich empfindet man ein Objekt, welches nach der Drittelregelung oder dem Goldenen Schnitt gestaltet wurde als "schön" und oftmals interessanter als eine zentrale Ansicht. Aber zum einen bietet nicht jedes Objekt überhaupt die Möglichkeit, die Teilungsregeln sinnvoll anzuwenden und zum zweiten sehe ich es nun wirklich bei den QI nicht als Notwendigkeit, jedes Bild derart zu gestalten. Natürlich darf ein QI kein Schnappschuss sein, so dass unnötiges Beiwerk auf dem Bild zu sehen ist, es sollte nicht schief sein, etc. Aber dass nun im Umkehrschluss jedes Bild nach Goldenem Schnitt zu gestalten sei oder anders gesagt wenn ein Bild nicht danach gestaltet sein soll, einem technisch guten Bild QI zu verweigern halte ich für schlicht falsch und nicht im Sinne der Regeln. Viele Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Gut, dann will ich noch einmal die Kritik an Deinem Bild Heizhaus_am_Goetheanum.jpg etwas anders motivieren. Ich habe das Bild gesehen und fand das Objekt, das Heizhaus, durchaus sehr intressant. Ich empfand das Bild trotzdem als wenig ansprechend, irgendwie unpassend und habe mich gefragt wieso. Das Ergebnis kannst du in meiner Bewertung lesen. Ich stimme dir zu, dass der Goldene Schnitt nicht zwingend sein muss und ich auch die Regel etwas zu hart fomuliert finde, der Versuch das subjektive Empfinden in eine technisch nachvollziehbare Regel zu packen. Nichtsdestotrotz verstehe ich die Regeln für QI, nicht nur rein technisch (Größe, Schärfe, Tiefenschärfem Rauschen,...), sondern auch sich auf die Gestaltung, Komposition beziehend.

Im Unterschied zum Turmkorb (dein Beispiel hier) ist das Heizhaus aber nicht allein auf dem Bild. Es gibt ein Zusammenspiel mit dem umgebenden Bäumen, dem Horizont, den Wolken. Dir viel Erfolg weiterhin! --Elektroschreiber (talk) 08:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Das Beispiel mit dem Turmkorb ist übrigens kein pathologisches Beispiel sondern Ergebnis einer Diskussion zum Thema Bildkomposition, die es vor einigen Jahren mal bei den exzellenten Bildern auf de.wikipedia gab. Sicherlich ist es bei Objekten am Boden leichter, den GS anzuwenden, in Falle des Heizhauses, was links und rechts durch hohe Bäume von diesem Standpunkt eingerahmt ist bringt diese Form der Bildgestaltung allerdings auch kein ansehnlicheres Bild. Dass Dir das Bild nicht gefällt sei Dir zugestanden, dass du dagegen stimmst natürlich auch. Allerdings ist hier keine bessere Alternative zu machen und im Sinne eines QI sehe ich die Bedingungen dennoch erfüllt. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Vielleicht darf ich hier ungefragt meinen Senf beisteuern. Ich bin nicht sehr häufig auf QI, schon gar nicht so häufig wie Wladyslaw, aber doch schon seit geraumer Weile und ich denke, dass es einen klaren Unterschied zwischen QI und FP geben sollte. QI sollte es auch für gute dokumentarische Fotos geben, die ein Subjekt mit hoher Qualität darstellen, aber nicht unbedingt einen Wow-Faktor mitbringen. Bei dem Bild von dem Heizhaus ist auch immerhin anzumerken, dass Wladyslaw nach einem geeigneten Blickwinkel gesucht hat und offenbar einen Hang fand, vom dem er das Haus recht gut erfassen konnte mitsamt der Landschaft dahinter. Der abgeschnittene Laternenmast und die Tanne ohne Spitze würden sicherlich einen FP-Status verhindern, aber bei FP schrecken ja auch manche nicht zurück, Bilder massiv zu photoshoppen, um alles Störende wegzuschaffen (man vergleiche dieses Original mit dem POTY 2008). Ich persönlich würde dem Bild also durchaus einen QI-Status zuerkennen. Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 09:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Jau, die Pferde sind ein wirklich übles Beispiel für enzyklopädische Zwecke unzulässige Manipulation. -- smial (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

I tend to support but why did you forget to geocode it ;)--MrPanyGoff 11:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
didn't forget it but I was just to lazy :) now it is added --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

 Support - I think it is the best in its category.--MrPanyGoff 13:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:08, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

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

review

•  Comment Not eligible as long as it is not geocoded. Hans 11:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  it is now --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:39, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Hans 11:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

 Support - Most illustrative, I think...--MrPanyGoff 20:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris - Eiffelturm9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Not that we don't know where this is, but this and the other images you nominated should be geotagged.Andrei Stroe 10:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC) done, also for the other candidates --Taxiarchos228 11:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rheinfelden - Altes Kraftwerk nach dem Abbruch.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tomer T 17:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Ulrich Madonna.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Harrison49 21:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kloster St Trudpert.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Harrison49 21:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche St. Gallus Ebringen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Harrison49 21:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wehr - St. Martin4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 bet that wasn't easy to PP. Well done. --Saffron Blaze 20:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wehr - St. Martin1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Saffron Blaze 12:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Films - GR - Seilbahn.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. A real sense of height. --Saffron Blaze 12:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochblauen - Aussichtsturm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Tomer T 16:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Efringen - Evangelische Kirche4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Could you crop it on the right hand side please? Mattbuck 04:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC) done --Taxiarchos228 13:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Better, thanks. Mattbuck 14:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment - Well, can I say some words? Possible scope names: 1."Postal buses in Switzerland" - acceptable scope but I don't recommend it because it is somehow still broad. 2. "MAN Lion's Regio" - classical scope of particular vehicle model. 3. "MAN Postal bus" - also good scope I think. I know that you are probably going to consider "MAN Lion's Regio Postal bus" making an attempt to reduce the competition ;) but it is too narrow imo.--MrPanyGoff 08:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Either too broad or too narrow. What shall I do? --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I think your photo has good chances to win in "MAN Lion's Regio" scope.--MrPanyGoff 18:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
done --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

 Support - I find it most illustrative also with good quality and pleasant photo as a whole.--MrPanyGoff 20:40, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:07, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 11:39, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Münster - Hafen2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Impressive view, good quality --Alupus 20:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Contra-Staumauer.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Mbdortmund 17:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lago di Vogorno.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --H005 00:31, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Istein - St. Michael3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Crisp and detailed with nice evening light giving nice colors. At this proximity I find the geometric distortion is natural. --Slaunger 20:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Istein - St. Michael1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Albeit the shadows leads to difficulties in the exposure, a reasonably good compromise has been found with not too highly exposed sunny areas and not too dark and noisy areas in shadow (hard to avoid the shadows in this environment). Overall nice atmosphere. I would recommend blurring the license plate number of the parked car to protect the privacy of the owner as a courtesy. --Slaunger 20:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Good but no geocoded. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
now it has --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

•  Support All crietria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Graz

Colour noise could be visible in the bottom left corner on the gray ground. Different green and red halftones. By the way, in Russian "gryaz" ("грязь") means "mud" :))).--PereslavlFoto (talk) 15:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Funny :) I have denoised the picture. Please review it once again if it is okay so. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Du hättest es ja nicht weit...

zum T/SÜD — magst nicht kommen, Wlady? --Schwäbin (talk) 10:49, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Schwäbin, in diesem Fall hätte ich es weit, weil ich zu der Zeit im Allgäu weilen werde. Aber danke für den Hinweis :) --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Da ist es mal vor der Haustüre... Schade, hätte gerne einen kleinen Fotografier-Rundgang mit Dir gemacht. Nun denn: Schönen Urlaub! --Schwäbin (talk) 11:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Huttingen - Katholische Kirche1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Above average quality. --High Contrast 19:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dornach - Goetheanum1a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --H005 12:59, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fridolinsbrücke Statue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good --H005 13:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment - This competitor should be also considered ;)--MrPanyGoff 20:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
if you like this angle than I have a better one, this File:Pano Confederation Bridge.jpg, but I am not convinced that your alternative is better --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:58, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

•  Support Good resolution --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

About File:Istein_-_St._Michael2.jpg

Hello Taxiarchos228
I think you are going to meet soon Pudelek, Alvesgaspar and me with your 500 QI !
Stachanowist congratulations for that !
I'm sorry my english is too poor for giving clear explanations in technical matters. Please forgive.
When one apply some perspective correction, it happens sometimes a kind of "flatness" (so is the car on your picture, and the gate of the church too. They are wide enough, but not high enough. One must "stretch up" or/and "stretch down" a little bit the picture, to make the squares square, and the circles really round. I hope you understand. Anyway, nicht schlimm.
By the way, I don't understand what you mean, you, with the "strong compression artefacts" on my Eiffel Tower. Could you please show me ?
Come on, only almost a dozen to go to 500 !
Friendly, --Jebulon (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fernmeldeturm Nürnberg2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and composition--Lmbuga 14:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Niagara Falls - ON - Konica Minolta Tower2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and composition--Lmbuga 14:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pano Confederation Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice panorama. --King of Hearts 10:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wehr - Wolfgangskapelle2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.. Please add geotag. --Cayambe 19:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chur - GR - Postbus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jovianeye 12:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basler Muenster Vincenz-Martyrium.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  QuestionThere appears to be some kind of geometric distortion here. The upper, left and right edges are nicely aligned, but the lower edge seems to be tilted. Is the plate really so non-rectangular? EXIF is missing. --Slaunger 21:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC) for me it's rectangular, if you want to correct it, feel free to do so. --Taxiarchos228 13:06, 6 June 2011 (UTC) You are right, it is OK as it is (although EXIF would still be nice, what happened to that)? --Slaunger 19:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lörrach-St. Peter - Winter1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Template:Autotranslate

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted/layout Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Re: Your QI-reviews

Sorry. My level of english is poor. I can't understand all your words (in a few moments perhaps I can understand it). I can say my opinion and my vote. Democratic it is to respect to the other: You do not respect. Sorry. It's my opinion--Miguel Bugallo 22:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Vandalismo

ESTE MENSAJE HA SIDO BORRADO POR USTED DE SU PÁGINA DE DISCUSIÓN. SE ESTÁ METIENDO EN UN LÍO

(Español) Si vuelve usted a borrar mis palabras, estén en la lengua que estén, aténgase a las consecuencias: Commons es un proyecto multilingüe en el que algunos usuarios estamos limitados para expresarnos en inglés--Miguel Bugallo 22:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

ADMINISTRATOR TO MEDIATE (sorry, poor english)

(Translation to poor english) I resort to an administrator. The same administrator who previously considered my activities inadequate before yours. I solicit that you are blocked

(spanish) Yo recurro a un administrador. El mismo administrador que anteriormente consideró inadecuadas mis actuaciones ante las tuyas. Solicito que usted sea bloqueado--Miguel Bugallo 22:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

My words to User:Cookie

Spanish words, sorry. --Miguel Bugallo 22:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Your QI-reviews

The words do not matter. You consider yourself enabled to delete my words. Anywhere. You have deleted them. --Miguel Bugallo 22:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Church in VA

Can you argue the 3 images of churches in VA? It would help us out of an embarrassing situation. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate CategorizationBot (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Image:Detail of Malsburg-Kaltenbach - Evangelische Kirche9.jpg was uncategorized on 15 June 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Bamberg Statue BW 1.JPG

Hallo, ich hatte die Kandidatur of withdrawn gesetzt, so kann sie dann eigentlich stehenbleiben bis sie vom bot abgeräumt wird. Ich habe vor lauter Begeisterung übersehen, dass es sich um einen Ausschnitt handelt. --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Ensign & wire

Thanks Template:Smile Łukasz [Wolf] Golowanow (talk) 19:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome :) --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:56, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Lizenz-Änderung?

Hallo Taxiarchos228, was genau hat dieser Edit zu bedeuten? Du selbst hast dieses Bild doch vor einiger Zeit unter GFDL+CC-BY-SA hochgeladen. --Túrelio (talk) 12:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Der Edit ist selbsterklärend. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die unkooperative Antwort. Nachträgliche Lizenzänderungen sind auf Commons i.a. nicht zulässig. Wenn dir nichts an Kommunikation liegt, kann ich das auch öffentlich thematisieren. --Túrelio (talk) 12:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich muss meine Motivation dafür nicht offenlegen. Welche Regel bestimmt, dass das nachträgliche ändern von Lizenzen unzulässig sein soll? Was Du thematisierst oder nicht interessiert mich nicht. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Licence Art Libre

Hallo Wladyslaw; mir ist gerade im Bild File:Bad Bellingen - Evangelische Kirche8.jpg aufgefallen, dass du dafür die Licence Art Libre verwendest hast. Laut diesem Blogbeitrag von Finanzer sind Bilder, die nur unter dieser Lizenz stehen, in der Wikipedia nicht verwendbar, da die Lizenz fordert, dass das ganze Werk, in dem ein Bild unter dieser Lizenz verwendet wird, ebenfalls unter diese Lizenz gestellt wird, d.h. mindestens der ganze Wikipedia-Artikel oder sogar die ganze Wikipedia. Ist dir das bewusst? Ich finde, es gibt unproblematischere Lizenzen. Mein ja nur... Gestumblindi (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Hm, es scheint, dass die aktuelle Version 1.3 dieser Lizenz wohl doch unproblematisch ist, siehe Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Licence_Art_Libre_.2F_Free_Art_License. Gruss, Gestumblindi (talk) 14:49, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Die FAL fordert nicht, dass das Werk unter FAL stehen muss sondern unter einer beliebigen freien Lizenz. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Das ist leider so nicht ganz korrekt. Denn dort steht, dass es eine kompatible freie Lizenz sein muss. Weder GFDL noch CC-BY-SA akzeptieren eine Lizenz als kompatibel, die nicht explizit angegeben ist. Weiter oben ist eine kompatible Lizenz definiert. Dort steht auch die Forderung, dass die anderen Lizenzen sie als kompatibel anerkennen müssen, damit sie kompatibel sind. Das ist nach aktuellem Stand jedoch nicht der Fall. Kleine, feine, aber evtl. doch recht böse Einschränkung. -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 09:55, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Rechtlich irrelevant. FAL fordert jedenfalls nicht, dass das Produkt wieder FAL sein muss. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

"Making Of" Kategorie anlegen

Hallo Wladyslaw, könntest du bitte für mich in der Hauptkategorie "Photography" die Unterkategorie "Making Of" anlegen. Ich hab mir die Vorgehensweise hierzu mehrfach durchgelesen ich schnall das einfach nicht. Will auch keinen Mist bauen. Vielleicht offenbaren ja dort dann andere Fotogarfen auch ihre "Geheimnisse" ;-) VG --Ritchyblack (talk) 11:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Bitte sehr: Category:Making Of. Ist die Kategorie nur für Bilder oder auch für Texte wie z.B. meine HDR-Anleitung? (User:Taxiarchos228/HDR) --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Wau, das ging aber schnell, super, danke. Warum den nicht auch Text, ich denke "Making Of" ist nicht nur an Film und Foto festgemacht. Also nur zu. --Ritchyblack (talk) 12:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

War ja auch kein Hexenwerk. Um eine Kategorie zu erzeugen, musst du lediglich die übergeordneten Kategorien aufführen. In dem Fall also reinschreiben: [[Category:Photography]]--Wladyslaw (talk) 12:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Heißt das man schreibt nur die nächst Übergeordnete rein oder muss bei tiefer Verzweigung der ganze Baum aufgeführt werden? Wenn das so einfach ist, ist es aber umständlich beschrieben. Ich werde es beim nächsten mal selbst versuchen;-) --Ritchyblack (talk) 13:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok ich hab's, es hat gefunkt. Hab gerade meine erste Kategorie erstellt. --Ritchyblack (talk) 13:34, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

EXIF-Frage

Hi,

manchmal wünschte ich mir bei deinen Bildern unten die Kameradaten (mit ISO, Blende, Verschluss etc.).

Ist es Absicht, dass die bei dir fast nie sichtbar sind? - Mfg A.Savin 06:49, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

nein, es ist keine Absicht. Aber da ich die meisten Bilder mit Programmen bearbeite, wo die EXIF nicht gespeichert werden kann, z.B. bei HDR, Panoramen da dort ja mehrere Bilder dem Resultat zugrunde liegen, fallen die Daten weg. Mir ist es dann in den meisten Fällen auch zu mühsam, die von Hand einzutragen. Das mache ich für gewöhnlich nur bei Bilder, die zu exzellenten gewählt werden oder wo man mich gezielt darauf anspricht. Wenn Du also bei bestimmten Bildern die Daten wissen möchtest, schaue ich sie gerne nach und ergänze sie. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:23, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich meine ja auch eher gewöhnliche Bilder (wie z.B. ein paar von den neuen QI einen Abschnitt drüber), eher keine Panoramen oder HDR. Nächstes Mal frage ich gerne nach. Allerdings gibt es auch einen recht billigen Trick, mit dem man EXIF überall ohne manuelle Eingabe erhalten kann und den ich seit längerem nutze: Originalversion öffnen und die bearbeitete Version aus der Zwischenablage dorthin an die Stelle des Originals (ggf. nach vorheriger Anpassung der Bildskalierung) einfügen, anschließend unter einem anderen Dateinamen speichern, um das Original nicht zu überschreiben. - Mfg A.Savin 12:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Die eigentliche Lehre aus dem Vorgehen ist: EXIF sind für die Katz und etwas für Erbsenzähler. Das einzig sinnvolle an denen ist das Datum, der Ort und evtl. noch das Farbprofil (auch eher was für Erbsenzähler). Alles andere kann man doch getrost in einer Gosse verschwinden lassen. -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 13:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, ist zwar ungefragt, aber mMn kann man dann gleich das ganze Bild ohne den EXIFs in der Gosse ... Für viele und auch für mich ist z.B. auch noch imemr von besonderer Bedeutung mit welcher Kamera und Objektiv das Photo gemacht worden ist, sei es als Kamera Empfehlung, sei es zur Abschreckung. Der Erbsenzähler, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Es freut mich ehrlich, wenn man die QI-Bilder als "gewöhnlich" ansieht und nicht als HDR. Faktisch ist es aber so, dass ich die HDR-Technik seit über einem Jahr konsequent bei über 90 % meiner hochgeladenen Bilder einsetze weil ich mit dem Lichtregler am RAW-Bild mittlerweile so hantiere, dass mir meist ein sehr gut ausgeleuchtetes Bild gelingt und dies auch deutlich besser als mit einer Tonwertkorrektur. Man soll den Bildern nicht ansehen, dass sie HDR sind. Du kannst aber davon ausgehen, dass da wo keine EXIF zu sehen ist HDR, Panoramatechnik oder beides eingesetzt wurde. Ich lösche die EXIF nicht extra raus. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

+1, auch ich finde die EXIF oft hilfreich, z.B. dann wenn man sich ein FP anschaut und gerne wissen würde wie der Fotograf das wohl hingekriegt hat, zumal mit einer durchaus handelsüblichen Ausrüstung. - A.Savin 19:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Wie bereits angeboten: wenn Dich spezifische Bilder interessieren trage ich die Daten gerne nach. Generell werde ich das allerdings nicht tun weil mir das für die Menge an Bildern, die ich bereitstelle zu viel Arbeit wäre. Ich stecke meine Zeit lieber in die gewissenhafte Auswahl und Bearbeitung der Bilder rein anstatt EXIF-Daten mühsam nachzutragen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

If you have HDR from separate photos, EXIF is mostly useless, but there is still some interesting data about date, time, lens, camera. For HDR prepared from 1 raw file processed with different settings — EXIF is truly useful. What about transferring EXIF data, there is a beautiful EXIFTOOL program, please check it. I can give the examples.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Lizenzrücknahme bei File:Toronto - ON - ROM3.jpg

Hallo, bitte beachte, dass die von dir vergebenen Lizenzen unwiderruflich sind. Entferne sie daher bitte nicht erneut von der Dateibeschreibungsseite. Danke und Grüße, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo, bitte beachte, dass Bilder von mir nur ich lizenzieren kann, Zuwiderhandlungen stellen ahndbare Rechtsverstöße dar. Danke und Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Beachte zusätzlich, daß die sogenannte Umlizenzierung der Foundation in Mitteleuropa einen Rechtsbruch darstellt. Wenn, wie du erwähnst, Lizenzen unwiderruflich sind, wieso werden die dann von dritter Hand verändert? --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Zur Kenntnis: [4]. --Túrelio (talk) 13:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Aslope

Re: File:B-memorial-4332-08.jpg. You say: "picture is aslope". What does this mean? I cannot understand the word and catch the idea, sorry. Could you please explain? Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The horizon is not precisely in line. To correct this you have to rotate the pic a little bit. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I compared to the vertical borders of the monument. They looks straight, so I did not mentioned any tilt. Well, anyway, if this is not QI, I'll make another photo next year... Woe am I...--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:36, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe the monument is awry, I don't know, can not evaluate this. But it seems not to be correct. See also annotations at the picture I have made now. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks like I was not directly in line, but one step away from the monument's center.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate -mattbuck (Talk) 00:41, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Unblock granted

Hallo Wladyslaw, ich fürchte, dass es so einfach nicht geht. Dies hier war ein knallhart befristetes Ultimatum mit der Ankündigung der Prüfung rechtlicher Schritte, falls es verstreichen sollte. So etwas geht hier überhaupt nicht. Somit sehe ich nur dann eine Möglichkeit der Aufhebung der Sperre, wenn Du erstens dieses Ultimatum ausdrücklich zurücknimmst und zweitens zusicherst, von ähnlichen Androhungen hier auf diesem Projekt zukünftig abzusehen. Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 19:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Fristsetzungen sind keine Drohungen. Die Ankündigung, den Sachverhalt prüfen zu lassen ist ebenfalls keine Androhung von persönlichen Konsequenzen. Ich würde empfehlen, hier nicht zu phantasieren sondern zu lesen, was ich geschrieben habe. Dass man den Satz missverstehen kann habe ich bereits eingeräumt und mehrfach auf Deutsch und Englisch klar gemacht, dass ich hier niemandem persönlich drohe. Wie oft willst Du die Klarstellung hören? Aber manche lesen das was sie lesen wollen; und wir wollen mal nicht vergessen, dass der hier beteiligte Admin erstens seine Rechte missbraucht hat und zweitens bereits eingeräumt hat, meine Diskussion die er selbst begonnen hat zu ignorieren. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Wladyslaw, ich bin erst heute darauf aufmerksam geworden, bin dem Link gefolgt und habe das sofort und unmittelbar als Drohung verstanden. Andere sehen das offenbar genauso. Deswegen lege ich nahe, diese Aussage ganz einfach zurückzunehmen. Dann ist eine weitere Diskussion über mögliche Interpretationen überflüssig. Ich bedaure sehr, wie dieser Konflikt verlaufen ist. Aber so wie die Sache jetzt steht, denke ich nicht, dass weitere Diskussionen über mögliche Interpretationen Dir hier helfen. Somit hilft nur Klarheit. Im übrigen kann ich keinen Missbrauch der Rechte eines Admins erkennen. Es ist auf Commons üblich, einmal eingeräumte Lizenzen sichtbar beizubehalten (abgesehen von Fällen kurz nach dem Upload, wenn es sich offensichtlich um einen Irrtum handelte). Bekanntlich können solche Lizenzen nicht einfach rückgängig gemacht werden und wenn wir Deine Bilder auf Wikimedia Commons unter einer CC-BY-SA-Lizenz erhalten haben, dann ist es das Recht dieses Projekts, diese Bilder auch künftig unter einer CC-BY-SA-Lizenz zu verbreiten. Dies gehört auch zu dem verantwortungsvollen Umgang mit den lizenz-konformen Nutzern Deiner Bilder (wovon es, wenn ich die überragende Qualität derselben berücksichtige, sicherlich nicht wenige geben wird). Aber zurück zum Punkt: Wenn Du bereit bist, die Aussage zurückzunehmen und ausdrücklich auf ähnliche „Ankündigungen“ in Zukunft zu verzichten, werde ich mich für eine Aufhebung dieser Sperre einsetzen, ansonsten nicht. Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 19:52, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Worum geht es Dir denn eigentlich? Geht es Dir um Reinwaschung von verschiedenen zumindest fragwürdigen Adminaktion oder geht es Dir wirklich darum, dass ich niemanden persönlich juristisch angehe? Wenn es dir um zweites geht dann habe ich das bereits vor meiner Sperre mehrfach klargestellt und heute auch wieder über Niabot übermitteln lassen: Nochmal im Klartext: ich habe niemals gegen irgendeinen Benutzer mit Klage gedroht sondern lediglich gesagt, die Sache rechtlich prüfen zu wollen. Sollte das jemand missverstanden haben, bekräftige ich dies noch einmal. Ist denke ich äußerst klar außer man möchte mit den bisherigen Unterstellungen fortfahren. Über die rechtliche Bewertung von Lizenzen und deren Kündigungs/ Änderungsmöglichkeiten diskutiere ich mit Dir in diesem Rahmen nicht. Das Runterbeten von hier etablierten Regeln hat mit der rechtlichen Realität nichts zu tun und ist damit wenig hilfreich. Auf wesentliche Hinweise in diesem Zusammenhang konnte nämlich bisher niemand argumentieren.

Und ChrisiPKs Aktion war dann kein Missbrauch wenn man die Beteiligung eines Editwar und das anschließende Sperren der betreffenden Seite als in Ordnung einstuft. Bei de.wikipedia wäre es ein Missbrauch. Und da man hier offenbar die selben Maßstäbe wie bei WP anlegt kann ich mir eine andere Auslegung nur schwerlich vorstellen. Und wir reden hier von einer respektlosen Aktion von ChrisiPK für die er sich zumindest ansatzweise entschuldigt hat. Wäre er auf die Diskussion eingegangen wäre die Sache nie eskaliert. Aber wenn Du Dich wirklich eingehend in diesen Fall eingelesen hast, dann hast Du hoffentlich diese Nuance nicht übersehen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Mir ging es darum, einen einfachen Weg zu finden, Deine Sperre umgehend aufzuheben. Ich fand diese unglücklich, aber ich kann sie auch nicht einfach so aufheben, da ich persönlich in dieser „Aufforderung“ nach wie vor ein Problem sehe und insbesondere nicht daran glaube, dass es ohne so eine Erklärung zügig einen Konsens für die Aufhebung der Sperre geben wird. Ich habe übrigens nicht behauptet, dass Du unmittelbar mit einer Klage gedroht hast, aber Formulierungen, die ein Ultimatum mit der Prüfung rechtlicher Schritte vereinen, werden gemeinhin als bedrohlich empfunden und sind deswegen hier nicht akzeptabel. Hier nun spitzfindig zu argumentieren, dass dies keine wirkliche Bedrohung sei, ist Dir unbenommen, aber richtig helfen tut es eben aus meiner Sicht nicht. Von daher sehe ich momentan zu meinem Bedauern keinen Weg, wie ich Dir persönlich hier jetzt helfen kann. Der Fall wird hier natürlich noch weiterdiskutiert werden und somit treffe ich hier auch keine endgültige Entscheidung. Auf den anderen Punkt bin ich hier nur eingegangen, weil Du in dieser Diskussion kontinuierlich von Admin-Missbrauch sprichst. Den sehe ich nach wie vor nicht. Es ist Dir auch vollkommen unbenommen, Deine eigenen juristischen Ansichten in Bezug auf die Praktiken auf Commons zu pflegen. Das bedeutet jedoch nicht automatisch, dass wir uns Deinen Ansichten beugen müssen. Am Ende musst Du Dir eben überlegen, ob Du einen Weg siehst, auf Wikimedia Commons in Einklang mit den hiesigen Richtlinien mitarbeiten zu können. Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Es ist Deine Entscheidung, ob Du eine infinite Sperre basierend auf einer mir in den Mund gelegten Aussage stützen willst oder nicht. Dass sie missverständlich verstanden werden konnte räumte ich ein und stellte alles klar, was es klarzustellen gibt. Sprachliche Interpretation existiert in diesem Fall nämlich 0. Du nennst die Sperre unglücklich, ich nenne sie haltlos. Ob ich bei Commons mit diesem Nick, mit Taka-Tuka-Land oder Lecker Wurstsalat hochlade (Namenswahl rein exemplarisch ohne juristischen, emotionalen oder sonstigen Hintergrund) ist mir so lang wie breit. Aber die Adminschaft, die hier bei Commons noch weniger Rückhalt in der Gemeinschaft genießt wie auf de.wp (und bereits da wissen wir beide, wie ein Großteil der Admins wahrgenommen wird), verspielt mit solchen offensichtlich rein emotionalen und persönlichen Entscheidung ihre eigene Grundlage und beschädigt das Projekt. Alles anderes wurde bereits gesagt und bedarf keiner Wiederholung. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Wladyslaw, wenn Du so dabei bleibst, dann sehe ich für mich keine Möglichkeit, Dir hier zu helfen. Aber einen Punkt möchte ich abschließend noch klarstellen: Die Sperre ist nicht infinite, sondern indefinite, d.h. unbestimmt. Solche Sperren werden verhängt, wenn ein Problem mit Deinen Beiträgen gesehen wird, das erst auszuräumen ist, bevor dieser Block wieder aufgehoben werden kann. Und ich fürchte, dass Deine jüngsten Äußerungen hier in keiner Weise dazu beitrugen, das Problem, das zu dieser Sperre führte, aus der Welt zu schaffen. Dies gilt insbesondere auch vor dem Hintergrund, dass es nicht nur eine solche Androhung gab, sondern offenbar mindestens eine weitere. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich werde die Lizenzfrage wie angekündigt rechtlich prüfen lassen. Zu Abmahnungen gegen einzelne Benutzer für vergangenen Aktivitäten, die dadurch Urheberrechtsverletzungen begangen haben, wird es nicht kommen; im Fall von User:Adrignola wären das immerhin über 300 Fälle. Ich werde bis zur Klärung auch keine Lizenzänderungen vornehmen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

• Please unblock me so that I can edit. Currently editing is not possible for me outside talk page while I see mattbuck unblocked me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Sollte noch Autoblock sein wie auf DE. Abmelden, IP wechseln, Anmelden und es sollte gehen. -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 13:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
    • Dann muss ich bis heute Abend warten. IP kann ich tagsüber nicht wechseln. Das ist ja eine grunddämliche Regelung. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
      • Es sieht so aus, als wäre inzwischen auch der Autoblock aufgehoben worden. Bitte teste es erneut. Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 14:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Category:Quality_images_of_Zürich

Template:Autotranslate Leyo 14:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

WLM CH

Hello,

I see that you live in Germany near Basel (CH). There is a photo-contest in switzerland : website. Ludo (talk) 20:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Dein Goetheanum-Bild in der Aargauer/Solothurner Zeitung

Hallo Wlady; mir ist heute in der Solothurner Zeitung (Bestandteil der az Gesamtausgabe) ein Artikel aufgefallen, in dem ganz gross ein Foto prangt, bei dem es sich offenbar um eine beschnittene Version deines Bildes Goetheanum Dornach.jpg handelt. Da ein Hinweis auf Urheber und/oder Lizenz fehlt (unter dem Foto steht nur "HO"), frage ich mich, ob du das genehmigt hast. Offenbar findet sich der Artikel auch in der Aargauer Zeitung (und anderen Blättern dieses Zeitungsverbunds?) Du kannst ihn dir ansehen: Wenn du unter http://www.solothurnerzeitung.ch/archiv nach "beton gewordener geist" (in Anführungszeichen) suchst, kannst du mit dem Link "PDF-Dokument öffnen" unten die ganze Seite mit dem Foto anschauen. Gestumblindi (talk) 20:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Es erfolgte keine Anfrage und ich habe meinen Namen auch nicht dergestalt geändert, dass ich unter "HO" wiedergegeben werden könnte. Besten Dank. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Post...

... für dich via Commonsmail. LG Grand-Duc (talk) 15:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Dein Bild in Zeitung

Hallo,

Heute war ein Bild von Dir zur Illustrierung in der lokalen Postille (Märkische Allgemeine, das Blatt für das Bundesland Brandenburg): [5] Vielleicht freuts Dich ja. Curtis Newton (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry, some times I cannot promote certain images because I cannot calibrate my monitor. If there are too many dark zones, I prefer that another user decides. I think that the image File:Häg-Ehrsberg - St. Michael3.jpg has a good quality, but I'm not sure. Thanks--Miguel Bugallo 09:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QIC

Hi Wladyslaw,

Congratulation for your nice job.

My intention was to promote the File:Schopfheim - Katholische Kirche5.jpg, but I miss effectively two times.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, no problem :-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:00, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Censored.png

Hello, Please stop the edit war on this DR. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Just block User:Ottava Rima indefinetly like it already happend on EN (en:User:Ottava Rima) and Meta (meta:User:Ottava Rima), because of his personal attacks (calling other pedophiles and so on) considering the same topic. Purely disruptive editing. -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 18:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Achso bevor ich es noch vergesse, ein weiterer Löschantrag aus der On-the-Edge-Ecke: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Censored_2.0.png -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 18:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted Template:VICpromoted -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

QIC

Hi Wladyslaw,

I have just send a new version of the File:0 Grille du Théatre royal de Mons.JPG. Can you tell me if this is OK for you now.

Thank you in advance.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Thoricourt PH1JPG.jpg

Wladyslaw,

I Have made the change. Thank you for your good advice.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:57, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

• Vielen Dank für alles

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

you are welcome --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Re:QIC

Good image. Good quality. File:Steinen-Hofen - Evangelische Kirche12.jpg--Miguel Bugallo 17:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks--Miguel Bugallo 11:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

QI Review

Hi, Thanks for your review on my picture on QIC. You were right, it was dark. I made a new version, do you think it is better now? Please change your review if so. If not, thanks anyway for the time you took. Have a nice day, Letartean (talk) 12:47, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I already have seen the improvement. But I think it is quite a little bit below my QI-standards. Did you have a RAW file of this image? If yes you can upload or send me by e-mail and I will try to balance the lights. Greetings to Canada --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:02, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

No I don't have the RAW file... Thanks anyway for your review and for your honesty. Letartean (talk) 14:51, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Schopfheim - Alte Stadtkirche26.jpg

Hi Taxiarchos,

Since I don't hope you think I "attack" a lot of your pictures, I didn't put this one in CR, but I think there are some HDR issues you should solve. Could you please have a look on my annotations ?

Have a nice week-end !--Jebulon (talk) 17:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Should be easy to fix. I'll look after it. --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Goetheaneum organ

hi. This short message to say that I find this picture fantastic, and I strongly hope it will pass in FPC ! Friendly, --Jebulon (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi. There is a problem with the final result of the vote. Please have a look. I dont know what to do, because the last vote was anonymous and therefore cannot count and it makes the difference between featured and not featured.--Jebulon (talk) 21:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

99of9 gave the answer [6] --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Schopfheim - Evangelische Stadtkirche1.jpg

Ist die so schief wie die in Lüneburg? Irgendwie kommt mir das Bild komisch vor...--Ralf Roletschek (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Nee, eigentlich ist sie nicht schief. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, ok. Bloß nicht verzerren! War nur ne Frage ;) --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 19:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Der ist dafür tatsächlich schief ;-) --Schwäbin (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Toronto

First, let me apologize for using a short and vague edit summary like "not an improvement". It wasn't intended to be snarky, but it sounds snarky, and it is way too vague to convey anything meaningful. It also comes across as a critique of your photograph, which it most certainly wasn't. I'm sorry about that.

I can elaborate. The problem I do have with your edit is twofold. The new photo doesn't really fit with the others -- both of which are close-ups. It's awkward with the other two. Second, I think it's better to use the works of a selection of photographers.

Finally, I think the existing photo of the city hall is great. That isn't a criticism of your photo - but both serve different purposes.

Obviously, you're free to disagree, in which case I encourage you to raise the issue on the gallery talk page. Thanks. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

thank you for leaving here a commend. My intention changing this picture was not to promote my own one. The reason was: the old picture has false colours and is very noisy. Your argument that the three pictures should be a close up is comprehensible. I have also a close up of the New City Hall of Toronto in much better quality. I can load this up and would like to exchange it. Greetings --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:22, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your comment. Go ahead with the exchange. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:59, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

By the way: I created today the side CN Tower starting with five images I made. I did this because I am assured that this pictures give a good representation of this tower and really good pictures are sadly rare. Some of this pictures are featured. My benchmark is quality. If s.o. takes better pictures sometimes he can exchange of course my pictures. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The CN Tower gallery looks great. I hadn't noticed that. By the way, I am unsure about Category:Baskets of CN Tower. I have never heard them referred to as baskets, and could not find that term at the en-wp article. Mind you, I am not sure what the proper term is (pods?). Where did you get the term? Are there similar categories for comparable towers? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure about the correct terminology in technical engineering. Maybe "pod" does fit better because the official name of the lower and bigger part is "Main Pod". In german the terminus for that building parts of towers is "Turmkorb", so I translated it into "basket". Feel free to rename it if "pod" is better in your opinion. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll try and figure out what the name is. I have no idea. :) Skeezix1000 (talk) 10:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Gegenlichtbild 2. Oktober (Frau im Feld)

Nabend Wlady, ich schreibe das hier ganz absichtlich öffentlich und nicht per Mail. Kannst du bitte einen Kommentar zum Bild abgeben? Ich bitte dich nicht um ein Gefälligkeits-pro, ich möchte eine ehrliche Meinung! Vielleicht auch zu meiner M9ini-Anleitung auf WV, du hast mit der Entwicklung von RAW viel mehr Erfahrung als ich. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 19:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ralf,

und wo finde ich das Bild bzw. die Kanidatur? Finde nichts. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hier ist die Kandidatur, das Bild rects - und meine Vorgehensweise beim Entwickeln findest du hier. Ich habe so lange an den Reglern gedreht, bis blaue und rote Bereiche nahezu weg waren, habe die farbtemperatur etwa den natürlichen Gegebenheiten (Abendsonne) angepaßt. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 20:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Kann hier aber auch guten Gewissens pro geben. Mal sehen ob mein "Chef-Widersprecher" was gegen sagt ;) Gegenlicht heißt im englischen übrigens "backlighting", habe es geändert. Hoffe, das war ok. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Klar ist das ok. Ich kann doch nur so gut/schlecht englisch, wie Google mir das souffliert ;) --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 08:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

In englisch sagt man auch "Contre-jour". Lol.--Jebulon (talk) 09:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

de:Landscape Formation One

Was ist das da mit der Lüftung über den Kiesfilter? Da fehlt noch was. --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 20:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

File:Dornach - Heizhaus1.jpg and File:Krakau - Globushaus1.jpg

Hello,

Could you please add the correct category in Commons:Valued images/Recently promoted for your images? Best regards, Yann (talk) 13:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Don't see an incorrect category on both images. What is the problem here? --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Never mind. I added the images in the "Works of art/Architecture" category. Yann (talk) 09:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I am not the contact person in this case although this are my pictures. Either the VIC-Bot do this work or the user that is doing the evaluation. But as far as I know the bot does not work at that time. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Baby in user page

Hey !?!

Is this little girl yours ?

Are you the happy father of this marvel ?

If yes, best wishes for the baby, long live to her !

And many deep congratulations to you !!

I hope the mother is fine !

That's a very good news !--Jebulon (talk) 00:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, she is my daughter :) Mother and baby are fine. Thank you for the congratulations and wishes. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Is she your first child ? I've six...--Jebulon (talk) 22:41, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, my first child. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Ay! You'll have very short nights for weeks...--Jebulon (talk) 11:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Until now she is very quite and good. But we'll see. Maybe I am not able to catch you up with the number of QI ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure at least you will "win" this "match", it is not a problem for me (if I'm the first reaching the 1000, of course!). Now, as an old and multiple father, here is my advice regarding another "match", the match " mother" vs "baby bottle": please prefer "mother ! Because 1) no need of boiling before feeding, and 2) at 02:00 or 03:00 AM, consider that only the mother can do the job, and enjoy your night peacefully !! Lol...--Jebulon (talk) 18:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Geophorus agglutinans

Wurde das Bild gleichzeitig doppelt nominiert? Es war irgendwie komisch, ich bekam beim Speichern die Meldung eines Bearbeitungskonfliktes, ging wieder raus, dann war das Bild aber doch da... --Llez (talk) 07:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Nein, das war mein Fehler, weil ich das Bild anstatt es auf das heutige Datum zu verschieben kopiert habe. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:11, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Toronto City Hall

Hello. Both are nice. I'd pick the first one, but go with the one that you like best. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

The first one with the clouds is fine. By the way I have tons of unpublished pictures of Toronto. I'll try to develop and upload them as far this little lady endorse it ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, congratulations! How wonderful. Baby first, then photos. :) --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :) --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Ich mags ja eher quadratisch ;) --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 20:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Stimmt, das Motiv bietet sich an, gefällt mir gut. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bruecke st. nazaire.jpg

Hallo Taxiarchos228. Ich habe dein nach Commons transferiertes Bild in der de-WP lokal wiederhergestellt. Falls noch mehr Bilder von dir nach einem Transfer nach Commons gelöscht worden sind oder noch werden, dann bitte einfach einen WP-Admin um Wiederherstellung. Danach sollten betreffende Bilder mittels {{Panoramafreiheit}} und {{Schutzlandprinzip}} getagt werden. --Leyo 17:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Dankeschön. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

kleine Bitte

Hallo, kannst du bitte schnell schauen, ob bei dir das Bild File:Georg Niedermeier VfB.jpg auch total verzerrt angezeigt wird? Weil bei mir taucht dieser Effekt bei solchen Bildern immer nur temporär auf. Und vor es wieder verschwindet... Ich habe unter Commons:Forum eine Diskussion dazu gestartet. --91.20.67.237 09:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

<ungefragt einmisch> Hab mal gepurgt, jetzt ist es nicht mehr verzerrt. Ob eine Drehung durch den Rotate Bot nötig ist, bin ich mir nicht ganz sicher, aber ich kläre das mit Saibo ab. Sollte dann in einigen Stunden alles okay sein. --Schwäbin (talk) 09:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

War ein Denkfehler meinerseits, Rotate bot ist beauftragt. In spätestens 2 Stunden ist das Bild dann korrekt (sprich: Die Orientierungsdaten in den EXIF berücksichtigt). --Schwäbin (talk) 09:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Neptune Fountain

Wladyslaw,

Thank you for your support in promoting my pictures and valuable advice that I followed in changing the framing of the picture: 0 Neptune Fountain - Piazza Navona - Rome (1). JPG.

Best regards.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 12:25, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jean-Pol,

but now the picture is not only at left but also on the right side too tight. And sadly there are also visible CA and the sharpness is not as good as your other pictures. Greetings --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:33, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

D90

Was ist für dich denn ein fairer Preis? ;) alofok* 16:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Antwort per Mail. --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Löschanträge

Hallo Taxiarchos228, bei Löschanträgen ist es hier auf Commons Pflicht, die jeweiligen Hochlader zu benachrichten (siehe Punkt 3 bei den Instruktionen zu dem Stellen eines Löschantrags, die auf der Dateibeschreibungsseite beim Löschantrag zu sehen sind, wenn sie aufgeklappt werden). Ich habe das jetzt bei Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jacket with blue fox belly fur.jpg und Commons:Deletion requests/File:Furrier Kischnick from Lörrach with his mink rats.jpg nachgeholt. Wenn mehrere Löschanträge sehr eng miteinander verwandt sind, dann können diese auch zusammengefasst werden. Viele Grüße, AFBorchert (talk) 18:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Hallo AFBorchert, danke für die Info. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 22:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FYI

...falls du das noch nicht bemerkt hast   &#x95; Richard &#x95; [®] &#x95; 21:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Mir entgeht fast nichts :) Aber danke: fürs informieren und nominieren. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

WLM discussion.

Hello Taxiarchos228,

As you where in the discussion where I promised to link you guys later on to the dutch WLM results. See User_talk:Alvesgaspar#Dutch WLM (our discussion).

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 22:40, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Herzlichen Glückwunsch...

... zu 1000 QIs --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:51, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

• Dankesehr. Der Dank gebührt natürlich auch all jenen, die die Bilder unterstützt haben. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

• Bravo ! --Jebulon (talk) 09:58, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Jebulon and thank you to all supporters and combatants. It was a quite marginal race at the end and I reached with two day delay but I have entered the record of the fastest rising QI because I started nominating not until December 2010 :) In real there is no impact about having 10, 100, 1000 or 10000 QI, but it's funny and sometimes actually instructive. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Verspätete Glückwünsche auch von mir. Ich habe echt Respekt davor, dass du hier so viele Bilder (so gut wie) täglich hochlädst. Nicht nur im Sinne der Enzyklopädie, sondern auch der Aufwand (fotografieren, auswerten, bearbeiten, hochladen), der damit verbunden ist und den ich ja selbst kenne. Somit auf weiteres positives als auch kritisierendes hin-und-her-Bewerten und auf garantiert folgende Wortgefechte, --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 21:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 22:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Template:FPpromotion /FPCBot (talk) 22:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

QI question

Re: Stefan Lichter's portrait on QIC. Could you please tell me the reason to make it QI? In my humble opinion, it has orange hue from the wrong WB settings. Thank you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

If there was orange light why should this picture have no orange hue? For me the WB seems natural. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:34, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I thought the coloured light has to be removed to keep «natural true» colours... That was the reason for my question... Thanks for the explaining.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Thanks

Thanks for denoising my QIC :-) --PierreSelim (talk) 08:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

File:Paris - Palais de Chaillot2.jpg

Template:Autotranslate~Pyb (talk) 14:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Please do not remove other peoples comments

Here thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:15, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

personal considerations should not be part of a functional talk page --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Leave other people's comments alone on any public page please. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

You know the difference between a personal talk page and a functional talk page? As admin you should know the difference. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:22, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

If it is your personal talk page you can do what you like within reason but not on a community one. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Obviously a serious problem to see what for a functional talk page is. No need for further conversation. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

Valued images

Can you please have a look on the 8 pictures of skijumpers after I change scope. Thank you. ----MGuf (d) 19:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted

File:Monumento a los héroes de Iquique, Valparaíso, Chile1.jpg

Hallo Taxiarchos, kannst du mir verraten wie du es geschafft hast? welches Tool hast du benutzt, um das Geräusch so stark zu reduzieren?. Ich habe nämlich ein anderes Bild, das ich auch nominieren möchte, aber laut Jebulon ist es noch nicht so weit. Ich habe ein paar Tips von Jebulon gefolgt und es ist viel besser geworden, aber mit dem Geräusch komme ich nicht wirklich weiter. Er meint, dass es ggf. an der Kamera liegt (ich habe eine Canon Rebel XTI), aber ich will hoffen, dass es an mir liegt :) Auf jeden Fall, vielen Dank für die neue Version der Datei und frohe Weihnachten! Poco a poco (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Poco o poco,

ganz erstaunt, dass Du Deutsch sprichst, hatte mir aber auch deine Babelbausteine bisher nicht genau angeschaut. Ich habe das Bild mit Neat Image entrauscht. Meiner Meinung nach eines der besten Programme dafür, allerdings keine freeware. Wie ich aber geschrieben habe, war das Rauschverhalten des Bildes nicht derart, dass es ein contra gerechtfertigt hätte. Aber Jebulon und ich sind sehr häufig unterschiedlicher Ansicht ;-) Ob das Rauschverhalten an der Kamera liegt oder an Dir kann ich nicht sagen. Dafür müsste ich erst Testberichte studieren. Generell gilt: die ISO-Einstellung sollte so tief wie möglich sein, dann reduziert man die Gefahr des Rauschens. Dir noch einen guten Jahreswechsel. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Info und deinen Einsatz. Das Program sieht interessant aus, ist aber leider auch so, dass die Demo-Version kaum vom Nutzen ist, da die eingeschränkten Funktionalitäten sehr erheblich sind.

Deutsch ist eigentlich eine "einfache" Sprache geworden, als ich mit dem Polnisch anfangen musste, aber davon kannst du wahrscheinlich auch ein Lied singen, mam razie? :) Jak już mówiłem, jest jeszcze jeden obraz z samym problemem, to: File:Tumba_de_Akbar_el_Grande-Sikandra-India01.JPG. Czy wierzysz, że mogę go nominować? Pozdrowienia z Polski!, Poco a poco (talk) 11:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Kann das Bild aus Indien auch gerne bearbeiten und eine Kandidatur würde ich dann auch an Deiner Stelle versuchen. Werde allerdings erst heute Abend dazu kommen, es zu berabeiten. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Heute Abend, morgen, in einem Monat,...es eilt überhaupt nicht, viele Grüße! Poco a poco (talk) 13:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Das Bild ist deutlich entrauscht. Das Bild hat allerdings ein anderes technisches Problem: die sogenannten Kompressionsartefakte; deutlich zu sehen an den Übergängen zwischen Himmel und Minaretten. Diese ergeben sich wenn das Bild zu stark komprimiert wurde. Falls Du das Bild in einem unbearbeiteten Zustand hast könnte man das neu hochladen und weniger stark komprimiert hochladen. Das könnte ein Punkt sein, wo strengere Kritiker das Bild nicht als QI ansehen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Die Originalversion der Datei ist die erste, die ich hochgeladen hatte, eine Version der Datei ohne JPEG Komprierung habe ich leider nicht. Ich habe dennoch den Verdacht, dass das was du meinst eine andere Ursache hat. Schau dir einfach die erste Version vom Bild an, und sag mir Bescheid, ob du auch da dieses Problem beobachten kannst. Vielen Dank für all deine Hilfe und schöne Grüsse, --Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Articles Promotion

Falls das LÖ-Langzeitprojekt demnächst (bis Ende Januar) offiziell das Licht der Welt erblicken sollte, könnte man das wohl noch hier unterbringen. Ich habe sonst mit Bapperln und Vignetten nichts am Hut, aber die unglaubliche Arbeit, die dort investiert wurde, schreit gerade danach. Was meinst Du? gruss Rauenstein (talk) 23:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC) P.S. Damit will ich aber keinesfalls Druck aufbauen, es gibt bestimmt später ähnliche/andere Möglichkeiten.

Hallo Rauenstein,

das Projekt befindet sich tatsächlich bereits in den letzten Zügen. Nach heutigem Stand sind noch nicht online: die Kirchen zu Todtnau und Zell im Wiesental. Die Todtnauer Kirchen habe ich bereits komplett fertig, nur noch nicht online gestellt. Mit den Zeller Kirchen habe ich heute begonnen und werden vermutlich in ca. einer Woche auch fertig sein. Auch die Liste werde ich vermutlich in den nächsten Tagen in den ANR stellen. Ich kenne mich mit den Bedingungen für den Zedler-Preis nicht aus. Wenn Du meinst, dass die Arbeit ein legitimer Kandidat ist (immerhin geht es hier wenn es dann fertig ist um 122 Artikel und eine Liste, ich dachte immer bei Zedler gehe es um einen Artikel) dann schlag es gerne vor. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:38, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Valued Image Promotion

Template:VICpromoted

Quality Image Promotion

Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted Template:QICpromoted