User talk:Bgag/Archives 2009

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Bgag!

Tip: Add categories to your files

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

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

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

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

BotMultichillT 05:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Ifaty beach Madagascar.jpg is uncategorized since 11 February 2009. BotMultichillT 05:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Quick Questions - Kazakh Image

Hello, I have a quick question about this image. How certain are you that these people are Kazakhs? I only ask because an editor at the Kazakh article on Wikipedia doesn't believe it belongs there. Before I restore it again I just wanted to check. Thanks. Otebig 00:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Teddy Bear cholla.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Schön durchgezeichnet. Fingalo 20:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

File:Colombo 01.jpg

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

review

•  Support OK for me. There is a slight CW tilt, but it is ok for VI. Added a link (to the cat) in the scope. --Eusebius (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Itsukushima-jinja torii at sunset.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 13:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gassho-zukuri farmhouse-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good details --Ianare 18:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Apache Lake 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good. --Dschwen 16:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Best candidate for me. --Eusebius (talk) 13:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 06:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 13:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 06:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saguaro 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Compression artefacts, can you upload a less compressed version? --Berthold Werner 18:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)  Comment I have imported another version. Hope it is better --Bgag 11:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC) Now ok for me. --Berthold Werner 09:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stout Arch, Mystery Valley.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Aggressive lighting - a very strong contrast between the darks and lights. --Siipikarja 19:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC) * Support For the location composition might be as good as it gets.Lighting is OK with me--Mbz1 03:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

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

review

 Support Gives the best overview. --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brihadeeswarar Temple 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks ok --High Contrast 10:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Oppose In my view, File:Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus 02.jpg is more valuable than this one.  Support →Diti the penguin — 08:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hum, I guess you were talking about another picture? --Eusebius (talk) 09:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Woops, never mind, it seems like I reviewed the wrong Firefox tab… I support this version. →Diti the penguin — 09:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 08:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 21:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 08:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Important proposal

I wrote a proposal for equalizing the different picture formats on FPC Please have a look. Best regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caméléon Madagascar 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments IMO could be FP too.--Mbz1 17:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hat Madagascar.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 like some sort of dust/sand spot to the bottom left of her left eye. If this isn't a camera problem and is a marking on her skin, then I will promote. --Jolly Janner 14:45, 16 April 2009 (UTC) It is bizarre. I have corrected the spot and imported a new version. --Bgag 21:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ogimachi Village-02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments sharp, clear --Ianare 06:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Looks ok to me. The "illustrative" criterion is difficult to judge for such scope, but I think the geographical context of the river is depicted well enough. --Eusebius (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 08:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment Please correct the tilt. Yann (talk) 12:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support OK for me. Image is above quality standards for VI, even without tilt correction (although it would actually be nice). --Eusebius (talk) 15:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Tilt corrected. --Bgag (talk) 23:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Good. Yann (talk) 17:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 21:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

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

review

 Comment Important tilt, that can be easily corrected. Yann (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment Tilt corrected based on the tower. --Bgag (talk) 23:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support A bit foggy, but it is the best we have. Yann (talk) 17:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 21:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support OK for me. A picture with the naked blade exposed along with its scabbard would have been useful as well. --Eusebius (talk) 21:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Door Sidi Bou Said.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments lovely --Ianare 18:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monument Valley 10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Correct exposure and details. --ComputerHotline 09:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Montezuma Castle National Monument 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Correct exposure and details. --ComputerHotline 09:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Theatre of Dougga.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 10:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Painted Ladies, Alamo Square.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 10:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Spices market Medenine.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Pudelek 10:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 11:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 09:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Door knocker, N'Kob.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Where does the strange mauve come from? Was that really the colour? --Karora 00:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)  Comment I don't know but it is the real color. --Bgag 03:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)  Support Good composition. --Karora 22:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jardins de la Ménara.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 considering camera --Ianare 23:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment I could also consider File:Tour Hassan-Rabat.jpg and File:Rabat Tour Hassan.jpg. Hard to choose. --Eusebius (talk) 10:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I think it is the best of the three. --Eusebius (talk) 11:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Photo de caméléon

Bonjour Bernard !

Je travaille pour le Muséum national d'histoire naturelle à Paris et j'ai trouvé votre photo de caméléon à l'occasion d'une recherche pour un dispositif multimédia. Nous sommes donc en train de mettre à jour une borne multimédia qui traite des eucaryotes (groupe de tous les organismes vivants possédant un noyau : animaux, plantes, champignons,...) et je souhaiterais avoir votre autorisation pour utiliser votre photo dans cet interactif.

Voici la référence de votre photo : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cam%C3%A9l%C3%A9on_Madagascar_02.jpg

Cette utilisation est bien entendue non-commerciale.

Acceptez-vous que nous utilisions votre photographie dans ces conditions ? Votre nom apparaîtra bien sûr dans les crédits.

Nous serions contents de vous inviter dans la Grande galerie si vous passez un jour à Paris.

A bientôt,

Ingrid Verleye

Pour me contacter : verleye@ mnhn.fr (sans espaces)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jambiya.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Neutral needs some cropping --Ianare 14:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC) . Done: Cropped --Bgag 16:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)  Support good details --Ianare 17:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 15:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support OK for me. The set of the three temples seems notable enough to warrant a scope on its own. --Eusebius (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 11:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dougga 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Ianare 18:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kumara Pukuna 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Composition works well. Good detail & interesting. --Karora 10:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dougga 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vatadage 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Meets QI requirements --Ianare 15:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vatadage 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments DOF is a bit wide but passes QI requirements for me. Lycaon 22:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sbeitla 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Correct details. --ComputerHotline 09:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Papier antaimoro.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Seems ok to me. Maedin 08:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Oppose - Scope too broad. How can a simple picture illustrate a city? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment- There are many pictures illustrating a city in Valued images Valued images by topic #1.11.2 Cities and towns. --Bgag (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • That is true, but in general much broader views of the cities are shown. I'm ready to change my mind if new arguments are presented though. Let's wait for more feedback -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 07:38, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Support We don't have much choice, and an aerial photo would be needed to have a broader view of the city. Still the main monument of the city (the temple) is visible. Yann (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Neutral for now. We always have the choice to wait until another image comes along with a wider view and not tilted e.g. Lycaon (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment- Tilt corrected. --Bgag (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Support According to the criteria, "A VI is the best available image of its type on Commons, not the best that can be conceived of". I believe this picture to be reasonably illustrative of the scope, showing a very specific -and broad enough- view of the city. --Eusebius (talk) 11:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. --Slaunger (talk) 20:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Antananarivo03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Beautiful picture. Rastaman3000 17:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gal Viharaya 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments would be a bit better if the crop on the top would be a bit wider --Mbdortmund 19:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Shouldn't the scope called "Taqiyah"? There is a separate article for Kufi, which seems to indicate that Taqiyah is specific to Muslims while Kufi is a broader use, or a specific use in Northern America. Yann (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment I think you're right. I have created the category Taqiyah and changed the scope of the picture. --Bgag (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
  •  Support The image matches the scope. Yann (talk) 19:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 09:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pine Tree Arch.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 11:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ville de Lévis02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. Maedin 16:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Could you please correct the perspective? Yann (talk) 09:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)  Done--Bgag (talk) 15:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

•  Support This scope should be illustrated with a portrait rather than landscape, but we don't have a good available portrait now. Yann (talk) 18:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 09:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monument Valley 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Order of the Garter 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Quality is fine, but maybe you should crop a bit more. Lycaon 19:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC)  Done --Bgag 23:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC) good details and colours --Mbdortmund 00:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support Good image for this scope. Yann (talk) 09:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 10:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment It seems for me to be the best illustration of Matsue on Commons. I am inclined to think the scope should be modified to the more concise Matsue, or perhaps even the more specific Matsue, Shimane (depending on if there is a risk of ambiguities). If that is done, I'll support. --Slaunger (talk) 12:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Done I have changed the scope. --Bgag (talk) 21:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Scope issue resolved. --Slaunger (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 09:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mission Santa Barbara.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Mbdortmund 13:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)  Support Nice photo --George Chernilevsky 17:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Adansonia grandidieri 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sidi Abderrahman.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Yann 18:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Apache Trail 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good photo --George Chernilevsky 05:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

File:Hassan II Mosque fountain.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hassan II Mosque fountain.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Yann 16:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Royal Palace, Meknes.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Nice. Yann 16:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Winfield and Helen Scott.jpg

File:Winfield and Helen Scott.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!

Sorry, see Commons:Derivative works; photos of statue artworks on display in the USA are generally not allowed on Commons unless the statues themselves can be shown to be public domain per age or free licensed for some other reason. This would probably be ok for en:Wikipedia if you wish to upload it there. Thanks. --Infrogmation (talk) 09:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathédrale St-Paul - coupole.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 my favorite Dome image in Category:St. Paul's Cathedral. Good viewpoint, good technicals. --Iotatau 21:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment Better global view than the others photos in its category, and the satellite view in this categ doesn't focus specially on this lake. I will support. Just a tiny request: could you plese add some info in the description about the part of the lake we are seeing? Because it is rather long (8 km) and the geocoded data point at the middle of the lake ;-). That's OK, but it would be informative to know reading the description if it is the upper part, on the south bank, near the dam or son on. --Myrabella (talk) 07:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment It is the central part of the lake (I have added this info in the description). The geocoded data in the description point really to the middle of the picture. --Bgag (talk) 11:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
  • The geocode should be on the point the picture was taken. Yann (talk) 16:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Looks OK to me. All criteria met. --Myrabella (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 09:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ifasina 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments looks tilted ccw --Mbdortmund 08:30, 20 June 2009 (UTC)  Done Tilt corrected. --Bgag 02:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC) Two roofs overexposed but otherwise good. Considering remoteness it's a QI. --Iotatau 09:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aghlabid cistern.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Maybe crop top and bottom edge to concentrate more on subject? --Iotatau 10:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)  Done --Bgag 02:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC) Good infrastructure image. --Iotatau 09:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment Hello, I am puzzled with the geocoded data in the description. There's nothing like a basin there. Try with 35° 41' 9.93" N 10° 5' 49.33" E : it is there ? You will see two basins in a satellite view, a big one and a smaller one, which is what fr.wikipedia describes. So, two requirements: please check the geocoded data; precise which basin we see in this image (nevertheless the finest of its category, IMO). --Myrabella (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

•  Done Thanks for the info, I have made the corrections in the description. --Bgag (talk) 16:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Looks OK to me. All criteria met. --Myrabella (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Street clock, Globe.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 16:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Comment Please add usage. Lycaon (talk) 18:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Done--Bgag (talk) 20:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

.Added some more ;-). Lycaon (talk) 22:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Looks good to me. Lycaon (talk) 22:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 15:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dried fish.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --H005 16:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Shore Temple 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice colours, good quality, appropriate lighting Tupungato 18:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bhima and Dharmaraja temples.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, good quality, appropriate lighting Tupungato 18:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support A complete and frontal view of this huge bas relief. Looks OK to me, all criteria met. --Myrabella (talk) 12:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment IMO it would be better with some location in the scope (e.g. town, the title of the en: article looks suitable)). As it is now, it doesn't mean much to a layman. Lycaon (talk) 19:43, 12 July 2009
•  Support Better. Lycaon (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

(UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 12:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Merci de ne pas télécharger de sculptures protégées par copyright

Bonjour,

Des oeuvres telles que File:Chihuly The Nature of Glass 04.jpg sont protégées par copyright aux USA (c'est différent du Canada où il y a une liberté de panorama). On ne peut donc pas les télécharger. Il faudrait que tu fasses les démarches nécessaires indiquées sur COM:DEL pour les faire supprimer. Merci. Teofilo (talk) 10:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Satmahal Prasada.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sky is overexposed, but main subject is already slightly underexposed, so this is probably the best possible balance for given lighting conditions. --Ferengi 06:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Madagascar milestones.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Painterly in detail and composition. —Daniel Case 04:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maison Quintal-Quesnel, Boucherville.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 needs correction of perspective --Mbdortmund 13:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)  Done Is it better now? --Bgag 16:48, 10 August 2009 (UTC)  Comment I tried it myself, please have a look. --Mbdortmund 10:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)  Comment It's much better like this. Can you remove the green lines. Thanks. --Bgag 11:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC) sorry, corrected --Mbdortmund 17:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC) Good now. -- H005 11:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haut Atlas01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 progression of colour into the haze. TimVickers 16:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hassan Tower 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good composition. --Marcok 14:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mission Santa Barbara01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 17:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Hassan II Mosque02.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hassan II Mosque02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good photo --Pudelek 08:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Polonnaruwa 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Useful photo, good lighting and composition, could be somewhat sharper. -- Smial 20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Miyajimaguchi.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments boat in the foreground left and white letters on the building slightly overexposured. Did you try to set these parts a little darker? --Mbdortmund 18:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC) I have uploaded a new version.--Bgag 03:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)  Support OK now. Yann 21:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Leather tanning, Fes.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Great! Yann 14:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Photographers Blackbelt

		THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S BLACKBELT
		J'ai l'honneur de vous décerner la Photographers Blackbelt (ceinture noire des photographes) pour vos photos remarquables et excellentes. --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ligularia dentata.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gassho-zukuri farmhouse-01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Composition could be better with more place on the left (croped because of the overexposed car?). Nice anyway --sfu 12:33, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Banco Español de Crédito.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Takayama-03.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 10:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fishhook Barrel Cactus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Archaeodontosaurus 16:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chain-fruit cholla.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Size a little small but useful topic -- Archaeodontosaurus 10:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hermitage of Sant Joan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 light is rather dull but the picture is ok imho. --Berthold Werner 07:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Traversier Alphonse Desjardins.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 image and quality is OK--Mbz1 15:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aqueduct of Segovia 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --George Chernilevsky 06:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monument Valley 18.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments very good --George Chernilevsky 06:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Amphitheatre of Tarragona 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 18:02, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! La Boqueria, Barcelona.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 09:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Font de la Cascada 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 10:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Belazao 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, with a slight regret for the somewhat tight crop at the bottom. --Cayambe 10:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Castell dels Tres Dragons 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very well done. --Cayambe 20:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Santa Maria del Pi tympanum.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Useful image, clean and clear --Herbythyme 16:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Segovia Alcazar stained glass 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Lovely. Unusual subject on the glass. --99of9 01:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)  Comment Removing my promote vote, I've just seen the heavy CA along the lead lines in the upper part of the window. Can you fix these? --99of9 11:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)  Comment I have uploaded a new version. Hope it is better. --Bgag 01:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)  Comment I've added a tag to show you the kind of fringes I mean. --99of9 06:12, 11 December 2009 (UTC) )  Comment I have uploaded a new version. Hope it is better. --Bgag 01:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)  Comment New version available. It should be OK. I have also cropped the picture. --Bgag 17:50, 11 December 2009 (UTC) Now that's good quality, well done. --99of9 21:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ciutadella Park fountain.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Segovia Alcazar stained glass 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 21:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aqueduct of Segovia 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Well done. --Cayambe 16:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monument Valley 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Technically well done, impressive landscape. --Ikiwaner 08:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tarragona Cathedral 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Disturbing crane, but QI, though. -- Smial 14:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC) The crane is really distracting. --Schlurcher 21:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC) No more crane. --Bgag 22:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)  Request Please add a retouched tag.

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Segovia Alcazar stained glass 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI, yes. -- Smial 14:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Woman doing laundry.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Berthold Werner 10:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brihadeeswarar Temple 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharp and good. --Cayambe 19:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Park Güell 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  QuestionWhy looks the ground in front of the church so strange? (Compression artefacts?) --Berthold Werner 10:24, 20 December 2009 (UTC) I don't know. It's like this. --Bgag 14:51, 20 December 2009 (UTC) Ok. --Berthold Werner 11:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Segovia Alcazar stained glass 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me - Darius Baužys 09:04, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brihadeeswarar Temple 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Pudelek 22:27, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stonehenge 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --Berthold Werner 11:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral of Santa Eulalia - gargoyle 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --George Chernilevsky 16:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral of Santa Eulalia - gargoyle 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --George Chernilevsky 16:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Palace Hotel, San Francisco05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. ZooFari 17:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral of Santa Eulalia - gargoyle 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 18:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)