User talk:Kallerna/2023

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to this page.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seoraksan National Park Korea 21.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 20:33, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seoul metro.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Lion-hearted85 15:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cheonggyecheon evening 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Lion-hearted85 15:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seoraksan National Park Korea 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --SHB2000 09:34, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seoraksan National Park Korea 20.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 looks like leaning in. And please try to improve the categorization. Thank you. --XRay 15:14, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Perspective corrected. Categorized to the exact category of the temple. --Kallerna 19:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. Thank you. --XRay 20:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seoul from Namsan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality and very nice. --Tournasol7 07:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sogong-dong traffic 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
Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 07:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dongdaemun Shopping Complex, Seoul 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Argenberg 11:53, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Yeouido Hangang Park from Mapo Bridge 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Cayambe 15:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seoraksan National Park Korea 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Isiwal 10:20, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2022! Please help with this survey

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

Dear Kallerna/2023,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2022, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again for a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 150K+ pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 35 countries around the world.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey.

Please fill in this short survey and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2022.

Kind regards, Wiki Loves Monuments team, 09:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Maebongsan Observatory 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dongdaemun Shopping Complex, Seoul 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
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Geumho-dong 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Geumho-dong 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! N Seoul Tower view 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
Tilted CCW, and I would crop a bit left and right to get rid of the comae. --C messier 14:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
What is comae? How much you see tilt? --Kallerna 07:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Comae are the tails in the lights caused by lens imperfections, usually appearing at the corners. The tilt is visible at the buildings, they all lean to the left. --C messier 20:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Fixed. --Kallerna 08:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
OK, but it also needs perspective correction. --C messier 22:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Fixed. --Kallerna 08:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:39, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cheonggyecheon evening 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
Slightly tilted CW and need proper categorization --MB-one 16:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
What is wrong with categorization? --Kallerna 07:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
The only descriptive category is about a stream at night. Neither does it appear to be shot during night time (sky, EXIF timestamp), nor is it showing just a stream, but rather some kind of urban scenery with a prominent water feature. --MB-one 17:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
It is the start of the Cheonggyecheon stream. Taken after the sunset, but you are right, more evening than night. That being said, I though that would be more suitable category than the main category of the stream. —-~~~~
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:39, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:The Hyundai Seoul Yeoui-dong 1.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:05, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Lotte World morning view 4.jpg

File:Lotte World morning view 4.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Lotte World morning view 3.jpg

File:Lotte World morning view 3.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Lotte World day view 6.jpg

File:Lotte World day view 6.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Yeouido 8.jpg

File:Yeouido 8.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:58, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Seoul City Hall.jpg

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:05, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:23 Saemunan-ro 5-gil, Jongno-gu, Seoul, South Korea.jpg

File:23 Saemunan-ro 5-gil, Jongno-gu, Seoul, South Korea.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:07, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Lotte World night view 1.jpg

File:Lotte World night view 1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Lotte World morning view 2.jpg

File:Lotte World morning view 2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 15:32, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Yeouido 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Again, likely to be deleted because South Korea lacks commercial FoP for contemporary buildings. -- Ikan Kekek 08:48, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
I made some additions to the licences. --Kallerna 10:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
My experience on COM:DR is that this kind of view is not de minimis. You need a broader skyline view for that. -- Ikan Kekek 18:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: In this photo, none of the buildings are not main object. De minimis is applicable. --Ox1997cow 14:30, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Ox1997cow 14:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
CommentOc1997cow, I've had this discussion involving similar photos of, for example, Dubai, and the conclusion has been that De minimis does not apply to photos in which individual copyrighted buildings occupy this much of the picture frame, and the photos have been deleted. I have no doubt, based on experience, that whenever this photo is nominated for deletion, it will be deleted from Commons. Having a QI designation will not protect it, either; FPs have been deleted due to architect's copyright. -- Ikan Kekek 17:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: See these cases. (case 1, case 2) In both cases, the decision to keep was taken from the deletion discussion. I think this photo is similar to the two cases. --Ox1997cow 01:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. They surprise me, because I've seen a bunch of similar cases go the other way. It seems that there isn't consistency from the closing admins. -- Ikan Kekek 08:03, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Myeongdong Cathedral 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 11:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gangnam from Yeoksam 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 Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 23:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! PJ view 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 23:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gangnam from Yeoksam 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Little ccw tilt --Poco a poco 08:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, corrected. --Kallerna 19:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Support Not perfect, but close enough --Poco a poco 19:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Myeongdong Cathedral 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
Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 10:36, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Changdeokgung Seoul 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Donhwamun Gate Changdeokgung 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:54, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Donhwamun Gate Changdeokgung 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
Support Pretty tight but still ok --Poco a poco 19:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Changdeokgung Seoul 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bongeunsa Seoul 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bongeunsa Seoul 8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 21:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bongeunsa Seoul 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 22:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Bongeunsa Seoul 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 09:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gyeonghoeru Seoul.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Granada 19:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Geunjeongjeon Seoul.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Granada 19:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Yeongdong-daero from Hyatt.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Yeriho 11:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Yeongdong-daero 1.jpg

Yours sincerely, Ox1997cow (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sultan Ahmed Mosque 2022 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
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brighton 2023 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 18:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Maebong Mountain view 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Uutelan kanava.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please 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 17:52, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sultan Ahmed Mosque 2022 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
At least 2 dust spots (middle left, top right) --Poco a poco 16:05, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 18:15, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! London Bridge 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 Good quality. --Milseburg 11:51, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hedera helix Dover.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Der Angemeldete 10:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brighton station.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 Some blown out highlights in the background. But Good quality. --Augustgeyler 11:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tower Bridge 2023 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 30 St Mary Axe from The Garden at 120 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
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Katherine's Church, Merstham 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. GEO location would be helpful. --Miha Peče 20:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hagia Sophia 2022 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Dust spots here as well. --Ermell 14:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 18:15, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
You did not get them all. --Ermell 22:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Can you point them out, can't see any? --Kallerna 09:51, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Done --Ermell 22:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 19:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sultan Ahmed Mosque 2022 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Dust spots to remove. --Ermell 14:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 18:15, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Still some left. --Ermell 22:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Can you point them out, can't see any? --Kallerna 09:51, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Done --Ermell 22:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 19:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hagia Sophia 2022 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
There's a dust spot on the top right --FlocciNivis 10:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 19:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality now. --FlocciNivis 13:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Brighton 2023 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --MB-one 12:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dover White Cliffs 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Der Angemeldete 14:36, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dover White Cliffs 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Der Angemeldete 14:36, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dover White Cliffs 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 19:32, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dover White Cliffs 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 19:32, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hastings beach panorama 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
Support Good quality. --Virtual-Pano 16:07, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St Clement's Church Old Romney.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dover White Cliffs 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seven Sisters 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 13:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seven Sisters 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
Support Good quality. --Acroterion 02:46, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seven Sisters 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 13:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Seven Sisters 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. I propose lighten up the shadows a bit. --Milseburg 15:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Saltdean 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
Comment I'd suggest adding a geocode. Can you tell if this was rendered out of several shots? --Augustgeyler 20:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Added the geocode. Yes, it was merged from several images. --Kallerna 16:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I think this very nice image can become QI, as soon as you mark it as panorama, by using the template Panorama --Augustgeyler 22:42, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Added, though never used that template before. I don't think it's necessary. --Kallerna 11:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Support Thank you. --Augustgeyler 13:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hastings beach.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 09:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dover White Cliffs 8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:26, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sølen 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:53, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Seven Sisters 3.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Seven Sisters 3.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Losvåttån Løkken Verk 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Meldal church.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 21:18, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ski slope Løkken Verk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 21:18, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Orkla Meldal.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Losvåttån Løkken Verk 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
Support Good quality. --Cr7Carlos 23:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Høydalskamben 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Løkken Verk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Høydalskamben panorama 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality --Ermell 20:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Høydalskamben panorama 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kringflottmyra 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
Support Good quality. --Wee Hong 05:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Høydalskamben panorama 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
Support Good quality. --Ermell 11:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Høydalskamben 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
Support Good quality. --Ermell 11:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Copenhill 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Copenhill 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 10:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Copenhill 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
Support Good quality. --Modern primat 16:52, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matthias Church 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 08:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hungarian Parliament Building 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Hungarian Parliament Building 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gellért Hill Danube 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. --Peulle 07:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Liberty Bridge Budapest 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
Support Good quality. --MB-one 19:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MOL Bubi bike.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Done. Good quality now -- Spurzem 20:20, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Elisabeth Bridge from Gellert.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Elisabeth Bridge underside.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 09:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gellért Hill Danube 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 09:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gellért Hill Danube 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 03:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Budapest Chairlift 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 03:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Liberty Bridge 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Halavar 18:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Liberty Bridge 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Halavar 18:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Berkåk stasjon 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. --Chainwit. 16:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holmenkollbakken 2023 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 06:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Roman Remains Flórián Square Park Budapest.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Dunno if it was necessary, but done anyways. --Kallerna 10:11, 1 May 2023 (UTC) Good quality. --Imehling 19:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holmenkollen stasjon Oslo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Holmenkollen stasjon Oslo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Berkåk stasjon 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oslo central station.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --XRay 05:41, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oslo Opera House 2023 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:33, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Helsinki tram snow 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 06:16, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Warsaw Metro Natolin 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:33, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Päijännettä Mustasalosta etelään - Haukkasalon rantaa.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Panoramic view from Palace of Culture and Science in Warsaw.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --LexKurochkin 07:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gdańsk Główny station 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
Support Good quality. --LexKurochkin 07:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Train Gdańsk Lech Wałęsa Airport 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 06:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Saint George church Sopot.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 06:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wydma Łącka 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 18:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Trójmiasto Landscape Park Sopot 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:59, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Palace of Culture and Science Warsaw 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
It needs a tilt/perspective correction --Poco a poco 15:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Fixing extreme perspective like this would result in funky looking end result. --Kallerna 05:49, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
I mean a tilt and HORIZONTAL perspective correction, not a vertical one, the result would look funky, as you say. You should though get the horizontals horizontal --Poco a poco 15:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
I rechecked the img in Photoshop and the horizontals seem to be horizontal already? --Kallerna 13:47, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
Support To be honest, I see room for improvement, but I also believe in the meanwhile that it is good enough --Poco a poco 21:07, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gdańsk - Stadion tram stop.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --BigDom 16:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fjord City.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 Little bit tilted CCW --Halavar 18:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 13:51, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality now. --Halavar 07:27, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Grünerløkka studenthus.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --FlocciNivis 10:43, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oslo Opera House 2023 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wydma Łącka 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Moroder 15:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Wydma Łącka 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Moroder 15:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Palmiarnia Oliwa 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
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:03, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Tagooty 17:04, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oliwa Palace Gdańsk 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:03, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pachołek hill view 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:03, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pachołek hill view 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 21:49, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Dâmbovița National Library of Romania.jpg

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:53, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Oliwa Cathedral Gdańsk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 verticals should be corrected. --Ermell 21:42, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Fixed. --Kallerna 16:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matka Canyon Skopje 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2023 ECA Wildwater Canoeing European Championships Matka Canyon 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality and an exciting photo. -- Ikan Kekek 18:51, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dortmund 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 06:42, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2023 ECA Wildwater Canoeing European Championships Matka Canyon 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 06:42, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matka Canyon Skopje 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Grunpfnul 20:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Dortmund 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --BigDom 16:36, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2023 ECA Wildwater Canoeing European Championships Matka Canyon 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --MB-one 10:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje panorama Kisela Voda.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 13:08, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! 2023 ECA Wildwater Canoeing European Championships Matka Canyon 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --MB-one 08:42, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matka Canyon Skopje 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

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

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Przhino Skopje.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --LexKurochkin 13:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje panorama Kisela Voda 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
Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 19:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Tuorsniemi aerial.jpg

Ihan tiedoksi voin sanoa että merkkaus johon yritin tehdä muokkauksen kuuluu vielä Tuorsniemeen. Klasipruukiin kuuluu puolestaan Suruttomientien alapuolelle jäävä uudempi alue. Näin ainakin sen perusteella mitä Porin kaupungin karttapalvelu ja siellä mainittavat tonttitiedot tietää kertoa. Santtu37 (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Okei, katsoin nuo itse Googlen karttapalveluiden perusteella, jossa tuo alue oli Klasipruukia. —kallerna (talk) 16:13, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Joo ei tuo Google näytä aina kaikkea niinkuin pitäisi. Eihän sieltä esimerkiksi löydy lainkaan mainintaa Kaanaankorven kaupunginosasta vaikka sellainen todellisuudessa kattaa käytännössä koko Porin edesmenneen titaanidioksiditehtaan alueen. Merkintävirheitä on tullut joitakin kertoja havaittua myös tienumeroiden kohdalla. Santtu37 (talk) 18:10, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Peshachki Bridge Skopje 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 Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 20:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Stone Bridge Skopje 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Michielverbeek 17:36, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Archaeological Museum of Macedonia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Chainwit. 19:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Macedonian Philharmonic.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 20:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Terragio67 12:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. I wish there would be coordinates to know faster where this nice place is. --Milseburg 08:52, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --RockyMasum 06:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Liridon 12:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Cs gamer.jpg

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

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Photograph of non-free game

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

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

– Pbrks ^(t • c) 14:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Cs gamer.jpg

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Abzeronow (talk) 15:55, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Carol Park 1.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Blue House Seoul 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Montoro 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:29, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Córdoba aerial 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. Could probably expand the description, like from which direction it was taken. --Plozessor 03:47, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 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
Support Good quality. --AFBorchert 05:57, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --ArildV 06:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ohrid Boardwalk 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --PaestumPaestum 13:22, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ancient Macedonian Theatre of Ohrid 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --PaestumPaestum 13:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of St. John at Kaneo 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --PaestumPaestum 13:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ohrid from Samuel's Fortress 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
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:55, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Samuel's Fortress Ohrid 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
Verticals should be corrected. --Ermell 10:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 11:54, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Millennium Cross Skopje 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Michielverbeek 17:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Danube Bratislava 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Interesting and good quality. --Milseburg 19:01, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vodno Telecommunication Tower 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. --Красный 11:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Millennium Cross Skopje 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Michielverbeek 17:22, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Samuel's Fortress Ohrid 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --MB-one 18:14, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ancient Macedonian Theatre of Ohrid 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Slight cw tilt, otherwise QI to me --Poco a poco 16:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
How much? Seems pretty straight to me. --Kallerna 19:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Try something like -0,2° --Poco a poco 16:06, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 16:28, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:21, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Church of St. John at Kaneo 6.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Church of St. John at Kaneo 6.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Auditorio de Tenerife.jpg

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 03:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Auditorio de Tenerife.jpg

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 03:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Nikola Church Matka 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 03:36, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Treska Matka.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 03:36, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Danube Bratislava 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 04:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Vrv Kale Skopje.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Tournasol7 04:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Huhtamo Church 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --XRay 05:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Huhtamo Church 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 Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kärkistensalmi Bridge 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:05, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kärkistensalmi Bridge 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:27, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Danube Bratislava 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:27, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kärkistensalmi Bridge 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Argenberg 12:27, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Samuel's Fortress Ohrid 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 19:30, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Halkidiki Kavourotrypes beach 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 17:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Koufo 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 Good photo, and you really capture the atmosphere of a beach at sunset. -- Ikan Kekek 06:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Halkidiki Kavourotrypes beach 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --ArildV 07:47, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sherpa Horse Riding Mavrovo 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
Support Good quality. --BigDom 11:55, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Tonivoda Mavrovo 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
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Valley Galičnik 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
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matka2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 18:42, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 20.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --XRay 05:52, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 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
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:24, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 23.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 25.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:32, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 24.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 27.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 30.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 31.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 10:05, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 41.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Really nice! --PaestumPaestum 20:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Macedonian Cross Aerodrom 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 06:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cevahir Towers 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 --Llez 06:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. John the Baptist Church Skopje.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 06:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Cevahir Towers 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 06:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MRT Center 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --XRay 06:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chateau Sopot 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 11:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Macedonian Cross Aerodrom 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
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MRT Center 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 11:59, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Government Headquarters Skopje.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --AFBorchert 06:32, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 51.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Porto Koufo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 17:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Destenika beach 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
Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 07:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Katlanovo hot springs 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 17:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Katlanovo hot springs 9.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 17:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje panorama 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 17:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Kärkistensalmi Bridge 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --ArildV 13:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje panorama 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Ok. --Sebring12Hrs 13:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje panorama 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 Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 13:48, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 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
Support Good quality. --XRay 07:14, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 09:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 17.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 06:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Katlanovo hot springs 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Kritzolina 18:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Imehling 17:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 39.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Imehling 17:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --ArildV 09:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 13.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 17:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 16.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 11:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Olympus National Park 15.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 15:26, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Yeouido 2.jpg

File:Yeouido 2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Yeouido 13.jpg

File:Yeouido 13.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matka Canyon Vrelo Cave 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality, at least when viewed at 5 MP. --Plozessor 04:47, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgrade Waterfront 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
Support Good quality. --XRay 07:11, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgrade Waterfront 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments The highest tower is hanging a bit to the right --Michielverbeek 09:00, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 09:18, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
QI now --Michielverbeek 19:11, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Church of Saint Sava 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 06:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Telekom Srbija TK centar 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Imehling 08:37, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia 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. --Imehling 08:40, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Matka Canyon Vrelo Cave 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
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 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
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Old Railway Bridge Belgrade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:55, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 19.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Velvet 09:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje view from Kale 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 01:37, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Toše Proeski Arena 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 Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 01:37, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sacred Heart of Jesus Skopje 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Rjcastillo 01:37, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality. --Peulle 09:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Museum of Yugoslavia.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Túllio F 15:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgrade Waterfront 8.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:56, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje 6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 05:15, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Students' dormitory Goce Delčev Skopje 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 18:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje view from Kale 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 18:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Students' dormitory Goce Delčev Skopje 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --Llez 06:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje Kale 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 --Llez 06:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Kallerna. --A.Savin 22:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC).

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Museum of the Republic of Macedonia 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
Support Good quality. --PaestumPaestum 17:33, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje Kale 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --PaestumPaestum 17:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! St. Mark Orthodox Church Belgrade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 17:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgrade Waterfront 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 17:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Old Sava Bridge 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 17:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Science Competition 2023

Logo for Wiki Science Competition

Dear uploader of European Science Photo Competition 2015 and Wiki Science Competition 2017, Wiki Science Competition 2019 and Wiki Science Competition 2021, we would like to remind you that Wiki Science Competition 2023 has started in almost all the countries.

If you want to take part in WSC2023, please consult this page. Only some national categories are associated to competitions with local prizes.

If you are an expert user, we remind you that images uploaded within the deadline can be included in any case in their national category even if not uploaded with the main interface.

If you already took part in a country that has completed its upload phase (such as Russia), please consider improving the description in English of your files (click on the edit button), since such description is what the international jury will use to evaluate them. World finalists will be finalized after March 2024.

Sorry for bothering you and have a nice wiki.

Message discussed here. If you do not want to receive these messages in the future, please unsubscribe from this list

Social media: Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Science&Wiki Wiki Science Competition
Hashtag: #WSC2023 #WikiScience #WikiScience2023

Alexmar983 (promotion team and academic committee) using MediaWiki message delivery--18:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Students' dormitory Goce Delčev Skopje 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 06:04, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje 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
Support Good quality. --Plozessor 06:04, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Students' dormitory Goce Delčev Skopje 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
Oppose Perspective issue. Buildings leaning in. --Basile Morin 04:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Thanks, fixed. --Kallerna 06:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 11:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje City Mall.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 05:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Shopping center Mavrovka Skopje.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 05:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MRT Center Skopje 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 05:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 11:32, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 7.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another 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 perspective and quality. --Tagooty 05:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Gazela bridge Belgrade.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 15:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Toše Proeski Arena 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 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
Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 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
Support Good quality. --ArildV 14:51, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Genex Tower 4.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kallerna (de-adminship)

Hi, Kallerna, since you did not respond to my queries by December 2, I have submitted a desysop nom which can be found at Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kallerna (de-adminship). I don't think I need to go any further on your talk page, so I'll leave it there. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Students' dormitory Goce Delčev Skopje 5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --C messier 14:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Macedonia 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 10:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MRT Center Skopje 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 10:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! MRT Center Skopje 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 --Michielverbeek 08:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport 2023.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Velvet 07:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Skopje 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 Good quality. --Milseburg 17:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Victoria Palace Bucharest.jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 02:59, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Kópakonan.jpg

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Høydalskamben 2.jpg, that you uploaded is now assessed as one of the finest pictures on Wikimedia Commons, the nomination is available at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Høydalskamben 2.jpg. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate, please do so at this nomination page.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)