User talk:Felix Koenig/Archive/2011

Happy New Year!

Felix, happy New 2011 Year! --Vizu (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, and I wish you a happy new year, too (a bit late, sorry). -- Felix König ✉ 16:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Marbach III 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. Alofok 18:14, 30 December 2010 (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:
Schloss Haigerloch.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope, imo. The whole ensemble is well represented.--MrPanyGoff 11:49, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Perlachturm Augsburg 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good perspective corection. — Jagro 12:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche Reutte 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 12:26, 7 January 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:
Walheim power plant.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Best in scope but I can not find the geocoding --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I'm very sorry. Added geocode now. -- Felix König ✉ 15:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Best in Scope, all criteria met now --George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:33, 10 January 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:
Iglesia de San Juan Bautista, Telde.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment I'm just wondering, isn't there some uniform language that we use when naming the scope? That is interesting because what if this recently promoted image was in scope named in the language of the subject's home country?--MrPanyGoff 19:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
  • The church is known as Iglesia de San Juan Bautista, so it wouldn't make much sense to choose the scope "Church of John the Baptist" in my opinion... -- Felix König ✉ 17:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Where is the church known as Iglesia de San Juan Bautista??? In Finland I suppose. ;) OK, I'm going to write it again: This temple is known as مسجد الرفاعى, This one is known as Храм Христа Спасителя and This one is known as Theseion Ναός Ηφαίστου. All of them are VI and use an uniform language as the scope name. Do you think that it makes sense creating a mixed-language scopes list? It would be a hard to use list, imo. I think that the scope of the nominated photo should be: St. John the Baptist Church, Telde (exterior).--MrPanyGoff 07:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Furthermore, the articles and photos in an encyclopedia are mostly for the people who don't know the subject and not so much for those who are familiar with it.--MrPanyGoff 08:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:10, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Friedhofskapelle Bönnigheim-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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Regiswindiskirche Lauffen 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Wirklich schön. --Mbdortmund 01:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! TDS Büroturm Neckarsulm 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ja, sehr gut.--Jebulon 18:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Turm Johanneskirche Gemmrigheim 2011-2.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments very good --Carschten 17:03, 21 January 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:
Cenobio de Valerón.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope, shows also parts of the surrounding --Llez (talk) 10:22, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:48, 24 January 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:
Fort St. Angelo.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support I feel that this image meets all the criteria and is the best image in the category. -- Admrboltz (talk) 01:00, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose I feel that the location is wrong. --Ikar.us (talk) 01:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
  • I see, it was the object location, with senseless heading parameter. Added camera location.  Support --Ikar.us (talk) 01:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church Arucas 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. Alofok 18:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Monument Arucas.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments okey. Alofok 18:03, 28 January 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:
Neckartor Kirchheim.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question What is the notability of this building? --Myrabella (talk) 08:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
  • It's something like the landmark of the town and passed nearly by everybody who uses the famous bike path. -- Felix König ✉ 20:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gemeindehalle Ilsfeld 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 geotag. --Cayambe 13:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Our lady of victories church Valletta 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 Good. --Cayambe 08:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schlosskapelle Liebenstein 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 lighting --Carschten 20:16, 30 January 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:
Marian and Holy Trinity column, Baden.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:38, 2 February 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:
Santa María de Guía church.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in its category so far.--MrPanyGoff 17:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bergfried Liebenstein 2011-2.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 quality. --Mbdortmund 16:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gasse Victoria Gozo 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 {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Portal Veitskirche Flein 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality except for the shadow on the walkway. --IdLoveOne 06:27, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochwasserrückhaltebecken Sontheim 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 boring image, but the quality is still good. --IdLoveOne 06:27, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kriegerdenkmal Flein 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 21:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Xewkija Rotunda 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 Good colors.--PetarM 18:20, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bahnhofsturm Stuttgart 2010.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 23:30, 20 February 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:
Chapel of Schloss Liebenstein.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:57, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ta' Pinu Church 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 Good to me. I like the composition.--Jebulon 23:41, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Traffic circle Rabat Malta 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 Good--Jebulon 16:44, 27 February 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:
Perlachturm Augsburg.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment I have some hesitation comparing with this photo.--MrPanyGoff 16:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

• • Me too, but I prefered this because on the other, the shops at the bottom are completely covered with the tram. -- Felix König ✉ 19:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Support Considering the good quality and the resolution, finally I support this one.--MrPanyGoff 19:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche Mettlach 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 11:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eingang Simeonstift Trier 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kraftwerk Bexbach 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 14:48, 12 March 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:
Bexbach Power Station.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Not much to choose, but this one is better than others.--Mile (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Protestantische Kirche Bexbach 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 19:48, 14 March 2010 (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:
Church of Reutte.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 10:17, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus Saarbrücken 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 18:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Antonius Trier 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 14:48, 27 March 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:
Church of John de Baptist, Arucas.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment - I have some hesitation considering this photo also. It has not so good quality and is distorted but gives additional information. Cannot decide which one for now.--MrPanyGoff 19:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

 Comment - I can understand, I also hesitated befor nominating. Some additional information, which isn't clearly visible on the pictures: The tow pictures are taken from different view of the building. The nominated picture is a view from the street, the other photo is taken from a higher part of the village hill. -- Felix König ✉ 18:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Support - Finally, the better quality and details make me support this one.

Since you are interested in this project you should also look at the nominated photos and review some of them. ;)--MrPanyGoff 18:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 06:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! War memorial Remich 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 20:32, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Europa-Galerie Saarbrücken 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 16:58, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Turm Abtei Tholey 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 QI. --David Perez 08:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lothar Späth Ilsfeld 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:56, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Bildnotizen

Hi,

es ist ja wirklich nicht böse gemeint und meine ironische Übertreibung der Notizen in diesem Bild File:Mummelsee-Kapelle 2011.jpg sollen eigentlich nur mein Argument untermauern, dass man in einem Bild immer alles mögliche beschriften kann, aber ich sehe in so einem Fall nun wirklich nicht, worin die Notwendigkeit besteht. Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Ich sehe keine Notwendigkeit jedweder Annotationen - schon bei ihrer Einführung war mir die Funktion ein Dorn im Auge. Auch ich selbst verwende die Dinger mehr ironisch als zur Illustration, wobei ich gerne zugebe, dass ich mich schon daran gewöhnt habe. 95 % meiner Bilder kommen ohne Notizen aus... dass es heute gleich zwei Stück mit Annotationen sind, lag wohl an meiner chronischen Langeweile ;-) Eines jedenfalls kann ich dir versichern: Meine nächsten hochgeladenen Bilder kommen ohne Notizen aus. Definitiv. Aus genannten Gründen. Grüße, -- Felix König ✉ 18:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Alpirsbach 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, but are these trivial annotations really necessary? --Taxiarchos228 10:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Freudenstadt 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 06:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Alter Turm Ottweiler 2011-2011-31-03.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 not as sharp as could be but good for QI --Taxiarchos228 06:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mummelsee-Kapelle 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 geotag. --Cayambe 15:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sonnenuhr Dornstetten 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 bin doch ein wenig über deine scheinbare Unerfahrenheit beim Fotografieren erschüttert; bei den KEB hättest du schon lernen müssen bzw. weißt du auch eigentlich, wie man mit Baustellen im Hintergrund umzugehen hat (Stichwort Sprengstoff etc.)... --Carschten 16:38, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hornisgrinde 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 nice --Taxiarchos228 11:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Siebenröhrenbrunnen 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 don"t understand why it was unassessed in november 2010. Good for QI IMO.--Jebulon 20:45, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Johanneskirche Horb 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 20:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus Flein 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 06:22, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Klosterreichenbach 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for QI, imo.--MrPanyGoff 21:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kongresszentrum Freudenstadt 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 be sharper but good overall quality and meets the criteria, imo.--MrPanyGoff 19:17, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orthodoxe Kirche Stettin 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 background. Perhaps crop on top and bottom? --Ikar.us 22:10, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hafenkräne Swinemünde 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --H005 20:23, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Turm Klosterkirche Klosterreichenbach 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 14:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wax museum Międzyzdroje 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 14:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Grötzingen 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 09:10, 15 August 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:
Town hall Freudenstadt.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support best in scope --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Oppose It is a town hall of unassuming architectural style (IMO) which has no article even on the German wiki. Any notability I'm not aware of? พ.s. 19:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
  • • This "unassuming architectural style" is called Heimatschutzarchitektur --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
  • An own article isn't part of the criteria. It's the town hall of a town with 24.000 inhabitants and part of the biggest market place of Germany. -- Felix König ✉ 10:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  • ...and of course it's relevant enough for an own article. You are cordially invited to write one. -- Felix König ✉ 10:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
    • Comment-quality of Wetenschatje is running often the same way: arthropod and other animals are relevant, architecture is not relevant for Wetenschatje beside of well known sightseeing places --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:57, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
•  Support we don't have many pictures of the townhall, but I can't imagine a picture more valuable for this subject. --Don-kun (talk) 19:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:19, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red Tower Mellieha.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 00:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gyrocopter Löchgau 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. - A.Savin 16:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Schorndorf 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 18:25, 23 August 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:
Red Tower (Mellieħa).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Altes Rathaus Waiblingen 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 20:04, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Stadtmuseum Güstrow 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  CommentGood technical quality, but the tree on the right is disturbing (see image note)--Ankara 10:23, 23 August 2011 (UTC) I think it's an important element of the composition. -- Felix Koenig 13:26, 23 August 2011 (UTC) I am not convinced so I will not review the image. I hope we get a second opinion. Regards--Ankara 13:29, 23 August 2011 (UTC)I agree with F.K. I do so sometimes. If well done (it is the case here), it fills empty spaces nicely, IMO. The main subject is not disturbed by the tree and is fully visible.--Jebulon 08:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

HDR

Hi,

deinen neueren Bildern kann man ansehen, dass Du HDR anwendest. Frage aus Interesse: welches Programm nutzt Du? Grüße --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Öhm, tut mir leid, aber ich benutze kein HDR. Grüße, -- Felix König ✉ 14:18, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Postamt Güstrow 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 08:55, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Heizkraftwerk Pforzheim 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:37, 30 August 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:
Town hall of Schorndorf.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Best in Scope --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 18:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church Lubin 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 12:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche Sittersdorf 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 13:54, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Patroller !

Counter Vandalism Unit

Hi Felix Koenig !

You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller ! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.

As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.

We could use you help at the Counter Vandalism Unit. For example by patrolling an Anonymous-edits checklist and checking a day-part.

If you have any questions please leave a message on the CVU talkpage or ask for help on IRC in #wikimedia-commons.

On commons, patrolling can be really hard due to the very different tasks and the multilingualism. Have a nice start. -- RE rillke questions? 15:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dacia Duster Feuerwehr IAA 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 17:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Toyota FT-86 II concept IAA 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jakubhal 13:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fabrik Rheinfelden Panorama.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 QI. --Alchemist-hp 19:36, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathausturm Crailsheim 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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! Rathaus Besigheim 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 für mich.--Jebulon 15:12, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dingli Cliffs 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 Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 20:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kirche Eisenkappel 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Vassil 19:59, 26 December 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:
Neckarsulm TDS office tower.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope, notes on the image, are very useful.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)