User talk:George Chernilevsky/Archive/Archive 2010 2

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rapana Black Sea 2009 G5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Iotatau 18:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! SDA Church Vinnitsa 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Had to retract promotion, geocode is missing. --MichaelBueker 12:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC) Sorry, I wasn't aware geocoding was optional. Now promoting again—add the geocode when you have the chance! --MichaelBueker 12:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Requesting your kind attention ...

Hi there! Yesterday, I nominated an image for Quality Image, not by the normal nomination, but right into "Consensual review", for reasons explained there. In short: It's not quite 2 MP, but then again it was taken six years ago. I'd kindly like to ask your (and a few others') opinion, so it won't go unnoticed. I'm very sorry if I am annoying you by not following standard procedure in this special case. Thank you for your time! --MichaelBueker (talk) 18:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done --George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments :) --MichaelBueker (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kiev 57mm ZIS-2 2007 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 08:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC). Previous null vote corrected now. --Cayambe 09:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 1134B Kerch 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, thanks --Herbythyme 08:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 1135M Pytlivyy 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Iotatau 22:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 320 Yenisey 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 valuable contribution. --Iotatau 07:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 775M AZOV 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 demonstrative Archaeodontosaurus 22:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

172

Your vote on Polish Wikipedia

Hello!
I'm very happy that you were so kind that you have voted on my picture on Polish Wikipedia. Unfortunately, your vote will be most probably cancelled due to our rules. One must have at least 100 edits to have the right to vote and you have only 30. Nevertheless, thank you very much. :) --Von.grzanka (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I have over 5,100 edits on Commons and over 400 in Russian Wiki --George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you do, but you have only 30 editions on Polish Wikipedia and that's what counts. --Von.grzanka (talk) 13:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to nominate your own, or any other, pictures to be featured in the Polish Wikipedia, the requirements are as follows:

• The author is an active user of pl.wiki (I believe you can be considered an active user at the moment);
• The image appears in at least one article;
• The image should have a description in Polish (I can do that for you);
• Anybody can nominate (that is: you can nominate your own pictures);

That is all. Wolf (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Three on one day. Are you really sure? It is possible, but it might be frowned upon. Besides, I could tell you how to make a nomination, I mean I could translate the template for you. Wolf (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Kalta Minor...

I guess I need rest! ;-) Thanks for your message. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Sergei Rachmaninoff LOC 30160 cropped.jpg

How shall I crop the image? Etincelles (talk) 20:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

1. It is very necessary more spaces at the left (main problem).

It is the composition law - more spaces in a sight direction. The sight is directed to the left.

+ 250 to +300 Pixels at left strong needed.

2. At top +180 - +220 pixels approximate need (medium problem).

3. At right + 150 pixels approximate need (tiny problem).

4. Bottom is OK.

Possibly, You again should process the original. With best regards --George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help, I have uploaded the altered image, is it any better? Etincelles (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Sergei Rachmaninoff LOC 30160 cropped.jpg

Thanks for your support of the image. Etincelles (talk) 15:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Greetings

Hello, I have three years of editing (mostly on the en.wikipedia) and have uploaded over 300 photos and placed all but three of them. Can you help me with some advice? I don't know how to CREATE a Category. I have noticed also that a lot of photos in the Category:Session musicians have yellow tags on them, and don't know how to help, or I would! Can you explain what needs to be done? Thanks. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 03:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

It is impossible to create an empty category. The program blocks it.

At first update a file description, add a category which does not exist.

Then it will be possible to create a category as in it already there is at least one file.

Yours faithfully, --George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:23, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much for responding! My focus on the Wikipedia regards the editing and procuring/placing photos for the biographies of musicians. I've been doing it for 3 years. Problem: I had NO experience previously with computers other than email, so I need someone to treat me as if I am a 12 year old, and just list what I must do. For example, How can I create a Category for bands from the 1960s- like Traffic, or Cream? I have photos like some of Steve Winwood, Jack Bruce, and other musicians but when I come to upload them here, they end up as "Category:Guitarists from the United Kingdom", or Bass guitarists from, etc. Or they are categorised by genre. "Rock musicians from the United Kingdom".

Question: If there's a [Category:The Yardbirds], and I uploaded photos years ago before the category existed. So how can I place this one: ([File:Jeff Beck 1.jpg]) [1] to that Category,[2] for example? Do you see my dilemma? By telling me how to move photos already uploaded into their proper categories, (or just as good, how to create a subcategory within it for them, I can make some order out of the chaos of just uploading everything and putting a very very general Category like "Music" for all 300+ photos I've uploaded --and worse, the hundreds more I find? I can do this work, if someone here will help by telling me how! Thanks, Leah --Leahtwosaints (talk) 22:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Note- I began to as a question earlier about Mike Mills but realized it was a bad example, so I removed it. But the question is still here for how I can move a photo from one group to another that is more fitting.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 06:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Leah!

Problem solving:

1. Open Image page.

2. At top click "edit" or [alt-shift-e].

3. In edit window at bottom You can add or replace or remove categories. For each category it is better to use a separate line.

Example

before

... some info ...

[[Category:Jeff Beck]]

after

... some info ...

[[Category:Jeff Beck]]

[[Category:The Yardbirds]]

4. Save result.

And read please this User:JovanCormac/CommonsProblems about problems.

With best regards, George --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! MiG-25RBS 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me --Herbythyme 15:09, 12 February 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:
Monument to flooded ships (in Sevastopol).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support All six criteria satisfied. Best in scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment May I suggest to precise the scope a bit more (e.g. "Monument to flooded ships in Sevastopol" or "Monument to flooded ships (Sevastopol)"): it will help to understand it at first sight, evoking the Crimean War and the Siege of Sevastopol in one added word. --Myrabella (talk) 10:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

• I do not know about any other Monument to Flooded ships, but update it --George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks; let's say the suggestion was made for the same reasons as in this previous review. I think it's important to show the town in the background, as the flooded ships were part of its defense in 1854. This QI does; it is precisely documented and geocoded =>  Support. --Myrabella (talk) 04:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 11:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Merci Georges!

Merci Georges. Tu es un véritable ami. Cet après midi nous avions une réunion entre WIKIMEDIA-France et la Ville de TOULOUSE. Nous avons conclu un protocole d’accord entre les archives de la ville et surtout le muséum d’Histoire naturelle. Pour la premier fois des wikipédiens vont pouvoir faire des photographies des pièces qui ne sont pas exposées et les verser directement dans COMMONS. Nous avons choisi le thème de la préhistoire, car les collections à Toulouse sont très riches. Pendant la réunion chacun a dit pourquoi il collaborait avec WIKIPEDIA. Quand çà a été mon tour j’ai dis le bonheur que j’ai d’avoir pu échanger des idées avec des personnes que je n’aurais jamais pu rencontrer sans cela, des français bien sûr, un danois, un luxembourgeois, et surtout un ami en Ukraine qui me fais regretter de ne pas parler le Russe. Je qui est amusant c’est qu’en rentrant j’avais ton message. WIKIPEDIA est une belle aventure.

Спасибо, Джордж. Ты настоящий друг. Во второй половине дня у нас была встреча Wikimedia-Франция и Тулузе. Мы заключили Меморандум о взаимопонимании между архивами в городе и особенно Музее естественной истории. Впервые в Википедии могут делать фотографии частей, которые не подвергаются и вылить прямо в Commons. Мы выбрали тему предысторию, как коллекции в Тулузе, являются весьма содержательными. В ходе встречи каждый имеет сказал, почему он сотрудничал с Wikipedia. Когда пришла моя очередь, я рассказал счастье, что я был обмен идеями с людьми, я никогда бы не встретил в противном случае, конечно, французский, датский одна, одна в Люксембурге, и в особенности Твой друг в Украине, который заставляет меня жалею, что не владеют русским языком. Мне смешно, что я возвращался ваше сообщение. Википедия большое приключение. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

By the way, maybe you can explain, why the muséum d’Histoire naturelle makes any protocole instead of simply selling the photos? Checking the practice of museums in Russia I see they are much more likely to sell rather than to give away for free. Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Tutufa bufo 2010 G1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tutufa bufo 2010 G1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 16:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

:)

Читал Ваш ответ в тот самый момент, когда Вы его переносили на мою страницу. :)

Большое спасибо за помощь! Скампецкий (talk) 16:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Soviet and Russian submarines

Hello George,
Would you have an advice to give about the suggestion to divide this set into several parts? The nominator suggests that the "set can be divided to Soviet submarines and Russian submarines. [...] Second variant is to divide this set into SSN, SSBN and SSGN sets." I am sure you would know better than me! Best regards, --Myrabella (talk) 11:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Myrabella!

I am not assured, what is it is really actual and exact image of submarines. These are very approximate drawings, in my opinion. In the description of files it is specified too that drawings can be not exact.

I ask now User:BezPRUzyn as good naval militarist --George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks George, I asked BezPRUzyn on your recommendation. --Myrabella (talk) 14:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello George, Your advice has been very useful and the review is about to be achieved with experts' opinions, so thank you again. By the way, do you know User:Alexpl? His work could interest you. Best regards, --Myrabella (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Merci Myrabella, c'est intéressant pour moi. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tram Tatra T4 Vinnitsa 2007 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Slight CA but good lighting and composition. --Iotatau 22:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 1124M Suzdalets 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Iotatau 19:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 1164 Moskva 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Iotatau 20:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 61M Smetlivyy 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- Archaeodontosaurus 18:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Brachypelma klaasi 2009 G01 cropped.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brachypelma klaasi 2009 G01 cropped.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 00:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Quality image

Privet George, image Seasquirt.jpg which You nominate as Quality image is already Feautered image. --Mile (talk) 14:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Great, i didnt know that, thanx for explaining. --Mile (talk) 17:23, 26 February 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:
LAZ E183 trolleybus.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Meets criteria --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Berthold Werner (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2010 (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:
Guard ship Pytlivyy.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Meets criteria --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:29, 26 February 2010 (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:
Kerch cruiser.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support - Best for this scope --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 17:44, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:31, 26 February 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:
Small ASW ship MPK-118.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Brachypelma klaasi 2009 G01 cropped.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

Featured picture candidate

Hello George,
Nice to meet you　Thank you for the Featured picture candidates of Pieris_rapae_which_copulates. good luck 池田正樹

Good　luck too! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:09, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Yes I can My self support good luck 池田正樹

Oh¡ I'm sorry　　I revised it geolocation　　Thank you 池田正樹　Masaki I keda

Hello George
Thank you Your Support to My FP Good luck see you agin 池田正樹

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Pieris rapae which copulates 0928.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pieris rapae which copulates 0928.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 08:05, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Nicholas church Sevastopol 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Alchemist-hp 01:15, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Living Statues 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- Archaeodontosaurus 06:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Living Statues 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Perfect placed in front of the tree. --Ikar.us 01:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Living Statues 2009 G4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very sharp, even the background. --Ikar.us 01:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

182

Requesting your kind attention

Hey there! :)
When you have the time, I invite you to review the discussion about this Valued image candidate concerning its scope. --MichaelBueker (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Performance art 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support VI rules are rather strict for scopes about churches:"Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope. Cathedral scopes are OK, but for other churches there should be a good reason, like being a pilgrimage place, being really famous, being architecturally exceptional". I think it is the case here. Its pyramidal architecture is notable; the fact that its outer walls are covered with plates containing lists of regiments and number of the fallen soldiers killed during the siege is worthy too. So the scope is OK to me. The nominated image is well documented and geocoded, and it is the best of its category indeed. --Myrabella (talk) 11:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Винница

Old tower top 2010 G1, наверху в круглом окошке на стекле хорошо виден цветной шум. Ещё на QI обычно просят геокод.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Геокод добавил, это опционально, но обязательного правила нет. На стекле натуральная пыль и грязь, очень естественно выглядит. Окна там вряд ли кто-нибудь сможет вымыть. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Потому и пишу сюда, что мне почудились там, именно почудились этакие цветные пятна, какие бывают при colour noise. А перспективу вы, наверное, выправляли программой?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Опционально? А на некоторых моих QI требовали его. Он, в общем, толкает в спину критиков :-).--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Обязательно геокод нужен только для VI, однако и там есть длинный список исключений. Это фото не исправлял, снято на зуме примерно 3-х, перспектива сразу правильная --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:51, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Old tower top 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Ikar.us 00:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St George's church Sapun M 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Mbdortmund 22:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 5 cm PaK 38 Sapun M 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me, useful --Herbythyme 16:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 5 cm PaK 38 Sapun M 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good image --Herbythyme 16:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 15 cm sFH 18 Sapun M 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Iotatau 12:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 10 5 cm leFH 18 Sapun M 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Also good. --Cayambe 16:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 10 5 cm leFH 18 Sapun M 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Ikar.us 12:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 10 5 cm leFH 18 Sapun M 2009 G3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, like the others, IMO. Maybe needs a different name or different description ? ----Jebulon 18:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Balaclava valley 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 and useful for history articles. --Iotatau 12:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St George's church Sapun M 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Ikar.us 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Grand Slam !!

Bonjour from Paris ! First I would like to congratulate you for your "grand slam" with your german guns pictures (I voted for the promotion of one of the howitzer). I thank you for your very nice opinions on some of my pictures, especially for my first contribution to VI, the passiflora quadrangularis. But I need help for the problem with the "scope", I don't understand how to satisfy your request... Anyway, it is for me very interesting to discover the country of Ukraine through your nice photographs (Valley of Death of Balaclava..., "c'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre !" opinion of gen. Bosquet about the charge of the british "light brigade"), and to become a better photograph through your kind commentaries ! Many thanks ! ----Jebulon (talk) 00:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Balaklava

C’est fait Georges, Avec plaisir, je suis à ta disposition. Amicalement --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rapana Black Sea 2009 G7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Iotatau 19:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Fomes fomentarius

Bonjour de Paris. As you seems to be a specialist, may I ask you about your opinion of my fungus in QI candidates, please ? Is it really a Fomes fomentarius ? You may review the photo too, but of course, I think yours (fungi and photos!) are much better than mine ! Many thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 11:30, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

thanks for review. Not so blurred, I feel...--Jebulon (talk) 16:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe too much posterization effect --George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Desna Sosonka 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Iotatau 10:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Commons Contributions Barnstar

		The Commons Contributions Barnstar
		I hereby award George Chernilevsky the Commons Contributions Barnstar – for your tireless work both regarding uploads of your own images and reviews of other users' works. The community can be proud to have you as a member. --Iotatau (talk) 17:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh! Many thanks! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)