User talk:Moonik/Archives 2011-2012

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Moonik!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- 08:49, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Mausolée_du_prince_impérial_à_Rueil-Malmaison_en_France.jpg

File:Mausolée_du_prince_impérial_à_Rueil-Malmaison_en_France.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!

Sebleouf (talk) 17:48, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Place de la Concorde à Paris 8e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 very nice --Taxiarchos228 13:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parc de Saint-Cloud avec vue sur la Tour Montparnasse.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parc de Saint-Cloud avec vue sur la Tour Eiffel.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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.--ArildV 07:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Domaine de Vert-Mont.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice pic, but the resolution is way too low. Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information. --Iifar 13:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC). Image remplaced with better resolution --Moonik 16:04, 8 October 2011 (UTC). QI to me now. --Iifar 16:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hôtel Bristol at Paris Place Vendôme.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, nice atmosphere. --Vassil 14:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished

Dear Moonik, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help. You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 00:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine du Grand Palais.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and composition. --Vassil 18:53, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Réponse de Jebulon

Bonjour Moonik,

Merci de ton message et de tes remerciements.

Tu auras compris que je suis parisien, et en effet, j'étais au Jardin du Luxembourg hier vers 16 heures, j'ai un peu "mitraillé", nous nous sommes donc peut-être croisés. Si ça se trouve, tu figures sur une de mes photos (ou moi sur une des tiennes !). Comme tu l'as vu, j'ai joué au touriste, pour finir sous la Tour Eiffel !

Naturellement, tes images m'intéressent beaucoup, parce qu'elles concernent pour beaucoup "ma" ville, ses merveilles et ses environs. Tes photos me parlent, même si parfois elles me déroutent un peu dans le style, surtout les cadrages. Même si je ne fais pas de commentaires, en général je les regarde avec attention. J'ai regretté ton escalier et ta voûte de Cluny (j'habite presque à côté !), c'était très prometteur, mais vraiment pas en grand format, dommage !! Note aussi que le pilier n'était pas vertical... La porte en revanche me paraissait bien (même si la ferrure en bas n'est pas très nette). Je crois avoir aussi rejeté une autre porte, celle de Saint-Louis-des-Invalides, mais c'est un sujet que je connais bien, pour l'avoir moi aussi photographié. Ton image présentait une sévère distorsion en "coussin à épingles", c'est vraiment dû à ton appareil ou à ta mise au point. Je connais ça aussi, ça m'arrive parfois, et c'est difficile à corriger je trouve.

Bravo en tous cas pour tes belles images, et pour faire ainsi la publicité de "notre" si belle ville ! Mon conseil: continuer sans se décourager, et tenter, oser, essayer !

Es-tu temporairement à Paris, ou y habites-tu définitivement ?

Moi je suis un "vieux", qui habite et travaille à Paris, sans être parisien de naissance (ils sont peu nombreux...)

J'espère avoir de tes nouvelles, n'hésite pas à me contacter !

Pardon pour les  Oppose, passés et à venir, mais on avance plus avec des échecs qu'avec des succès je crois.

Bien cordialement et à bientôt.--Jebulon (talk) 09:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hôtel de Cluny (porte) Paris 5e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough for QI.--Jebulon 22:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Votre photo est très belle, je l'ai utilisée pour illustrer l'article sur le ferronnier d'art Pierre Boulanger sur Wikipédia: Pierre Boulanger Si vous avez l'occasion de passer de nouveau devant l'hotel de Cluny, j'aimerai bien que vous photographiez la penture supérieure droite du portail d'entrée qui donne sur la cour car il est inscrit dans le fer: Albert Lenoir ? 1852 P. Boulanger ? Voir: réunion des musées nationaux

J'aimerai bien avoir la signature de Boulanger pour l'article sus-nommé.

Un grand merci d'avance

Roi.dagobert (talk) 17:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Penture porte musée :::Cluny signée

J'ai eu la photo que je désirais, c'est super ! Merci à vous tous!

et j'en ai profité pour faire une nouvelle catégorie: Pierre Boulanger (ferronnier)

A bientôt

Roi.dagobert (talk) 19:14, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Et c'est désormais une "image de qualité" !--Jebulon (talk) 14:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

C'est effectivement une image de qualité! Elle enrichit la catégorie! Roi.dagobert (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine du Marché-aux-Carmes Paris 6e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. I know the place --Jebulon 13:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Une image de valeur

As tu pensé à proposer certaine de tes photos en images de valeur ? Je pense par exemple à File:Fontaine de la Place François Ier.jpg qui me paraît être la meilleur image dans le scope Category:Fontaine de la Place François-Ier. Au passage, j'ai effectué le renommage que tu avais demandé. Bonne journée en tout cas, et bravo pour tes photos qui sont de bonnes qualités et bien décrites. PierreSelim (talk) 11:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Moonik!

Tip: Add categories to your files

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

Here's how:

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

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

[[Category:Category name]]

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

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

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

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

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

CategorizationBot (talk) 12:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

• Image:Fontaine de la Place François Ier Paris 8e vue globale.jpg was uncategorized on 3 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 12:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine de l'Archevêché.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice picture, a bit overprocessed IMO (saturation), but really leaning to the left, with a need of perspective correction. All correctible.--Jebulon 18:22, 1 November 2011 (UTC) Done I hope will be good now --Moonik 05:57, 2 November 2011 (UTC)Better, indeed. La flèche de Notre-Dame penche encore un peu, but it is good for QI.--Jebulon 09:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Re QIC

Bonjour Moonik.

Merci de ton message.

Pardon d'y répondre si tard, mais c'est finalement adapté, puisque le message se place juste sous la photo (promue) dont il est question.

Je connais bien l'endroit, naturellement. Peut-être que ton appareil fait de lui-même quelques réglages ? Au fond ce n'est pas très important, cette photo est belle et plaisante à regarder.

Quoi qu'il en soit, j'aime beaucoup la façon dont tu vois les choses, et ce n'est pas la première fois que nos "objectifs" se croisent sur le même sujet.

Le dernier en date étant, je crois, cette "Fontaine du marché-au-Carmes" du square Gabriel Pierné derrière l'Institut.

J'essaie de ne pas faire de photos à caractère trop "artistique", car je souhaite rester "encyclopédique" (car il me semble que c'est la vocation de "Commons", plutôt qu'un "concours de beauté").

J'offre des images pour qu'elles puissent être éventuellement utilisées, pas seulement regardées.

C'est pourquoi j'insiste souvent sur les perspectives que je souhaite droites, par exemple.

En revanche, ce que j'aime faire, c'est varier les sujets, et parfois même surprendre ceux qui regardent mes photos. D'un seul coup, tu trouveras une cabine téléphonique, une machine à tickets de train ou un simple nichoir, au milieu d'images plus "prestigieuses". C'est sûrement un peu provocateur, mais dans le bon sens je crois.

A vrai dire, j'ai un jugement personnel un peu sévère sur ceux qui nous assènent 8 ou 10 photos à la suite du même sujet, sous tous les angles, sans discernement et sans vrai choix "éditorial". On sent alors la course à la "QI", rien que pour faire nombre... Remarque, j'en parle à mon aise, j'ai ce qu'il faut en quantité !

Je crois d'ailleurs que dès que j'aurai atteint les mille, je lèverai un peu le pied...

Au plaisir de voir tes images et de te lire !--Jebulon (talk) 18:30, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Coucou, me revoilà.

J'ai bien lu ton message, je suis à peu près d'accord avec toi, sauf que je tiens très fort à ce qu'il n'y ait pas de confusion entre "Commons" et les wikipedia, de quelque langue qu'elles soient. Ce n'est pas la même chose, même si les projets sont liés.

Je pense en effet que la WP en français est mal illustrée, par des photos de médiocre qualité, ou trop anciennes. Il n'y a pas de rafraîchissement, et c'est dommage.

Les photos que je prends, je les prends pour "Commons", pas en pensant spécialement à WP. Je m'aperçois parfois (et ça me flatte) que certaines de mes photos sont reprises dans des articles par d'autres utilisateurs, mais je n'ai pas le réflexe immédiat de faire ça moi-même, ça vient après.

J'ai déjà pris des photos sur la commande expresse d'autres contributeurs, mais jamais avec l'idée d'illustrer un article de wp. je n'oublie toutefois pas le côté encyclopédique de la chose, tant dans la composition de mes photos (sans fantaisie, descriptives plutôt qu'"artsy"), que dans les sujets choisis (un banc, un meuble, etc...), tu t'en rendras compte si tu te promènes dans mes galeries d'images. Tout peut faire un sujet.

La fontaine de Gréard : j'habite dans le 5ème, je passe presque tous les jours devant, et je ne l'avais jamais vue, je ne savais même pas qu'elle existait ! J'ai vu ta réalisation, elle n'est pas si mal ! OK pour le défi, je tâcherai de le relever;

A bientôt, --Jebulon (talk) 09:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Bonsoir Moonik.

Je n'ai pas du tout l'impression que Wikipedia soit morte, où as-tu vu ça ??

En tous cas, moi, je m'en sers souvent (presque tous les jours), et j'y interviens de temps en temps (mais je n'ai jamais écrit d'article, je n'ose pas me lancer) pour des corrections en français ou autres (j'aime beaucoup la langue française, et je trouve que bien trop de Français la massacrent ! Toi tu te débrouilles très bien, mieux que certains francophones de naissance !!)

Pour l'instant, je "souffle" un peu sur "Commons", à vrai dire je n'ai plus tellement de réserves de photos à charger. Mais on annonce une fin de semaine avec une pas trop mauvaise lumière sur Paris, peut-être irai-je faire quelques photos (dont cette fameuse fontaine...)

Une confidence: je ne suis pas très emballé par ta vision de la place Saint-Sulpice, la fontaine des quatre évêques. Mais elle est il est vrai difficile à capter dans son ensemble. Je tâcherai d'essayer quelque chose aussi. Tu bannis par principe toute prise de vue centrée sur le sujet, tu fais des images un peu "décalées", à droite ou à gauche.

Tu auras vu que je suis plutôt un adepte de la symétrie (en général, car il y a des exceptions, par choix esthétique personnel, bien sûr, et aussi pour toujours privilégier l'aspect encyclopédique)

Mais chacun ses goûts, il y a de la place pour tout le monde et tous les styles !

A bientôt

Amitiés, --Jebulon (talk) 18:00, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Bienvenue

Bonjour, bienvenue sur Commons (même si tu n'es pas tout nouvelle). Quelques remarques sur les conventions locales:

• Comme sur la Wikipédia en anglais, les noms de catégories sont au pluriel. "Artificial waterfalls in Bois de Boulogne (Paris)" était donc correct.
• Dans la mesure du possible, il faut essayer de mettre une description en anglais, car c'est la langue que le plus de gens comprennent. Bien sûr ajouter d'autres langue est toujours positif.
• Il vaut mieux éviter de mettre dans une description un modèle "creator" qui n'existe pas encore. Par exemple dans Category:Fontaine des Ambassadeurs (Paris), il faudrait créer Creator:Francisque Duret. C'est facile : il suffit de cliquer sur le lien puis sur "preload this page with a creator template" et enfin de remplir en anglais le petit formulaire.

N'hésite pas à me recontacter si tu as des questions sur ce genre de choses (mais pour la technique photographique il vaut mieux s'adresser à Jebulon). --Zolo (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Si la catégorie fait référence à un objet unique, il vaut effectivement mieux utiliser le singulier. En revanche, si la catégorie ne contient pour le moment qu'une fontaine mais que d'autres existent, il faut utiliser le singulier. A vrai dire je ne sais pas combien il y en a dans le Bois de Boulogne. S'il n'y en a qu'une, je pense il vaudrait mieux appeler la catégorie "Artficial waterfall of the Bois de Boulogne", pour que ce soit plus clair.

Commons n'a pas vocation à se substituer à Wikipédia, mais une petite description est toujours utile. Pour les oeuvre d'art, la pratique actuelle est de donner les informations suggérées sur Template:Artwork/doc. Une grande partie d'entre elles peuvent être standardisées et donc traduites automatiquement dans diverses langues sans avoir besoin de créer de créer de vrais articles. La partie description ne devrait pas être trop longue, mais quatre ou cinq lignes peuvent souvent être utiles, surtout pour les Wikipédias qui ne possèdent pas d'article sur l'oeuvre.

La pratique actuelle est de mettre l'information dans les fichiers en utilisant {{Artwork}}. Pour diverses raisons, je pense qu'il est désirable de l'avoir également dans la catégorie associée, de là {{Category definition: Object}} (qui n'est qu'un variation sur {{Artwork}}. Mais dans presque tous les cas, il faut que l'information apparaisse aussi dans le fichier : c'est le moyen le plus simple pour tout le monde la trouve facilement depuis Wikipédia ou tout autre site utilisant Commons.

Pour la Joconde, c'est Category:Mona Lisa.--Zolo (talk) 07:39, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah et petite astuce. Si tu veux recatégorier des fichiers, tu peux aller dans "gadgets" -> "préférences" et activer "hotcat", c'est beaucoup plus commode.--Zolo (talk) 07:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Moonik. You have new messages at Zolo's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• rebonjour Zolo, alors c'est bien parti pour l'utilisation des templates dans les catégories! En revenant aux cascades, effectivement, si on réfléchit bien, au Bois de Boulogne elles sont finalement deux: une sur le lac inférieur et une sur l'avenue Longchamps... rolf
  et bonne journée à toi --Moonik (talk) 10:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Support Best in scope. Yann (talk) 07:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 13:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Et hop ! Félicitations pour cett "Image de Valeur". C'est la première, si je ne me trompe ?!--Jebulon (talk) 18:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine Charlemagne Paris 4e 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good to me. QI. --Coyau 14:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Agree. Better.--Jebulon 16:18, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Hôtel Bristol at Paris Place Vendôme.jpg

Jolie photo (même si j'aimerais autant sans le lampadaire), mais pour moi l'hôtel Bristol c'est plutôt celui-ci, A mon avis il faudrait un titre moins trompeur. --Zolo (talk) 17:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Moonik. You have new messages at Zolo's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pagode Parc de Bagatelle Paris 16e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good picture --Taxiarchos228 14:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine des Quatre-Saisons Paris 7 détail 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. --Taxiarchos228 13:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Kategoryzacja ulic Gdańska

Witaj. Przez przypadek zauważyłem Twój wpis na dyskusji u usera "Artur-Andrzej". W kategoryzacji, ulice które przebiegają przez więcej niż jedną jednostkę szeregujemy ogólnie do Gdańska jak np. Aleja Grunwaldzka. Ulica Łąkowa znajduje się częściowo na Długich Ogrodach i pewnie dlatego tam się znalazła. pozdr 80.171.50.99 14:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, nie wiedziałam. To w takim razie będzie trzeba ją pokrajać na kawałki i podłączyć do odpowiednich dzielnic, tak jak z Grunwaldzką. Dzięki za informację --Moonik (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine des Ambassadeurs Paris 8e 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Why not a "portrait" framing ?--Jebulon 16:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)  Done It's better? --Moonik 14:53, 13 November 2011 (UTC) I like it, QI for me -- Achim Raschka 17:48, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine Saint-Sulpice Paris 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 --Ximonic 10:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)  Comment Hey, what happened with the people's faces? Otherwise good quality indeed.--MrPanyGoff 10:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC) Hi, to protect the prived live, faces were a little bit noised --Moonik 10:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)  Oppose Sorry, I can't accept these faces, the people look like monsters. --Quartl 05:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)  Done The original version of file is upload now, without face noising. I hope it will be better --Moonik 12:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC) Thanks, I removed my opposition. --Quartl 13:58, 9 November 2011 (UTC)  Comment I don't understand the framing...--Jebulon 15:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC) I sacrificed the bottom of the fountain to have the bigger top. It isn't good? --Moonik 15:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC) Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Quartl (talk) 13:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Błąd w nazwie kategorii

Witaj.
W nazwie utworzonej przez Ciebie kategorii Streets in Zaspa (Gdańsk ) znalazł się błąd - spacja przed nawiasem zamykającym. Pozdrawiam, tsca (talk) 15:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bateau-mouche waiting for the tourists Paris 8e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 10:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Passerelle suspendue Buttes Chaumont Paris 19e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice colors and composition.--Jebulon 11:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Collège Pierre-Jean-de-Béranger Paris 3e - Heurtoir.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 10:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grand bassin octogonal Jardin des Tuileries 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me Jean-Pol GRANDMONT 14:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

•  Question Je suppose qu'elle penche vraiment n'est-ce pas? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
•  Info Ça ne saute pas vraiment aux yeux une fois sur place, mais en regardant de plus prêt d'autres photos effectivement elle penche. Prenant par exemple, la photo Fontainestgermain.jpg, qui était visiblement prise de l'autre côté de la fontaine elle penche mais cette fois-ci vers la gauche. --Moonik (talk) 15:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
•  Support All criteria met; Thank you for the explanation --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:19, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Folie Saint-James.jpg

Bonjour Moonik,

Merci pour ton support. En outre je suis prêt à promouvoir la photographie susmentionnée dont j'aime beaucoup les couleurs et l'atmosphère. Toutefois, il me semble qu'elle peut être améliorée par un redressement supplémentaire de perspective et un léger recadrage qui mettrait mieux en valeur le bâtiment.

Amicalement.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 13:58, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

• Vue et promue

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 15:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

QIC et FPC

bonjour chère Moonik.

merci pour ton message et pardon pour mes votes de ces derniers temps... C'est peut-être du au fait que je connais bien les lieux que tu photographies, et que mon jugement est probablement faussé par ma propre vision de ces monuments.

j'essaie en tous cas d'être sincère et vrai. J'espère ne pas te décourager, car j'aime tes images.

Pour Massillon, moi je redresse ce genre de défauts avec GIMP qui est comme photoshop, mais en gratuit. Jette un coup d'oeil et tu verras, c'est très utile, même si c'est un peu dur au début. il y a des tutoriels sur Internet, et même des videos sur Youtube.

si j'ai le temps, j'essaierai de faire la correction dès que possible.

bien amicalement, --Jebulon (talk) 12:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done Je me suis occupé de Massillon. J'ai l'impression que c'est mieux. Si tu n'es pas d'accord, tu es naturellement libre de revenir à la version précédente. Amitiés,--Jebulon (talk) 13:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ricinus communis - Fruits.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice, QI and usefull. I would like that the yellow flowers were in focus to contrast more, but good good picture--Lmbuga 18:47, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Grand bassin octogonal Jardin des Tuileries 003.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grand bassin octogonal Jardin des Tuileries 003.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine Saint-Sulpice Paris 6 (Massillon).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Please see annotations.--Jebulon 17:22, 3 December 2011 (UTC)  Done I've tried something. Please feel free to revert if wrong. Thanks.--Jebulon 13:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)  Comment Great! It's better now and even more symmetric, Thanks a lot Jebulon --Moonik 13:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC) Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 19:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Malmaison - Salle de billard 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 04:51, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bougival Berges de Seine 005.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice. Should be maybe better with a little crop at left (the useless house) and a bit more space at right IMO, but QI--Jebulon 11:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Wesołych Świąt!

Une bûche de Noël (faite maison) pour toi !

Bonjour Moonik ! Je te souhaite un joyeux Noël !--Jebulon (talk) 14:55, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

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

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Versailles - Le Hameau de la Reine 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good for me. --Aleks G 23:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bougival Berges de Seine 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 14:42, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le Port-Marly Château Monte-Cristo 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me --Carschten 11:10, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Al-mawazin next to the Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem4.jpg

Cześć Moonik, wysłałem nową wersję pliku. Teraz wygląda chyba lepiej, co myślisz? Pozdrowienia i Wszyskiego Najpelszego, Poco a poco (talk) 15:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Wysłałem nową wersję, ale nie mogłem się identyfikować CAs ze mówisz. Jeśli problem nie jeszcz rozwiązany, proszę, można dołączyć notatkę, aby go zaznaczyć? Dziękuje! Poco a poco (talk) 17:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le Port-Marly Château d'If 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --ANGELUS 01:51, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suresnes - Écluse de Suresnes 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good.--Jebulon 15:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le Port-Marly Château d'If 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 fixed distortion and added some contrast. You can revert it, if you don't like it. --Iifar 17:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)  Support good now --Archaeodontosaurus 18:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grande terrasse de Saint-Germain-en-Laye 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality and nice image composition. Why so limited EXIF data?. --NorbertNagel 21:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Support All Criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Wojska Polskiego w Gdańsku

₰ Co było przyczyną utworzenia dwóch kategorii dla alei i ulicy WP w Strzyży/Oliwie? Z tego, co kojarzę, nie ma rozróżnienia na odcinek pod nazwą "ul." i pod nazwą "al." Panek (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Écluses

bonjour Moonik,

Ne crions pas victoire trop tôt, mais je crois que tes écluses sont bien parties pour emporter le succès. C'est une très belle image, je suis content que le découpage suggéré semble ainsi emporter l'adhésion. C'est étonnant comme une modification toute simple parvient à changer l'aspect d'une image ! Bonne continuation, et merci pour tes belles photos.--Jebulon (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Catégorisation

Bonjour Moonik et merci pour ton message. Il est vrai que la question de la catégorisation est délicate et nous sommes sans doute loin encore d'avoir trouvé la formule idéale. Cela dit, concernant le problème que tu soulèves, et en regardant ce que tu as fait pour Category:Footbridges in France, je pense que la solution que tu as trouvée, même si elle peut paraître un peu lourde, est très intéressante. En tout cas, je n'en connais pas de meilleure. L'as-tu utilisée pour d'autres catégories et as-tu eu du feedback d'autres contributeurs ?
Au passage, félicitations pour ton français !
Cordialement, Mu (talk) 17:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Suresnes - Écluse de Suresnes 001 crop.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Suresnes - Écluse de Suresnes 001.JPG has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pagode Parc de Bagatelle avec Mirror japonais Paris 16e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Is it really tilted or is it a tilted picture? Otherwise good. --Kadellar 14:06, 4 February 2012 (UTC)  Done it's not really tilted. I upload a corrected image. --Moonik 15:22, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Better now. --Kadellar 18:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris 5e Jardin Tino Rossi 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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.--ArildV 15:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont de Billancourt 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI IMO.--ArildV 15:25, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fenêtre Paris 3e 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --ArildV 11:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Need a small perspective correction, otherwise good and a interesting house.--ArildV 09:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)  Done The new corrected version is uploaded. Is it better now? --Moonik 10:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Very good now IMO.--ArildV 11:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rueil-Malmaison Berges de Seine 008.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple de l'Amour a Neuilly 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me --Jkadavoor 08:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for yor crop suggestion regarding my image at QIC. I try my best to provide more space around the subject after I got lot of comments regarding the crop but this is an uncropped image as I captured. Regards, Jee - Jkadavoor (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Vassil edit the picture Psyche_Leptosia_nina_by_kadavoor.JPG to provide some space on top and now it is on Consensual Review. Hope you like the new look. - Jkadavoor (talk) 06:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Corrections

OK, no problem! I see a lot of great images by you, bravo! I fixed a little bit more, and i am glad that you like it! All best, be well! :) --WhiteWriter ^speaks 14:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Carreau du Temple Paris 3e 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 10:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Carreau du Temple Paris 3e 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 10:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 01:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Musée Paul Belmondo à Boulogne-Billancourt 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Seems rather dull. Mattbuck 10:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)  Comment I don't know how to correct dull ? --Moonik 11:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC) QI for me. --PereslavlFoto 12:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gare Pont de Sèvres 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mbdortmund 00:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Michaelertor Hofburg Vienne

Chère Moonik,

Nul besoin de t'excuser.

Tu as parfaitement mis le doigt sur les imperfections de cette photo que je dois corriger, j'ai été un peu présomptueux sur cette image qui, en effet, est loin d'être suffisamment présentable.

Je ne me choque absolument pas de ton commentaire et de ta décision, c'est le "jeu" et c'est très bien.

Merci de t'être intéressée à cette image, je vais essayer de l'améliorer.

à bientôt;--Jebulon (talk) 11:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont Louis-Philippe Paris 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 005.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I think, a perspective distortion correction could impove the image. Tower is vertical, gateposts are not. --NorbertNagel 19:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)  Done I have try to correct it, the new file is uploaded. I hope it's better now. --Moonik 10:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)  Comment Something went wrong with correction, look at the right side and upper right corner of the image. --Iifar 17:49, 28 February 2012 (UTC) Done I uploaded new corrected version from the original file. Revert it, if you don't like it. --Iifar 17:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC).  Support Looks ok to me. --Iifar 19:43, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Quality images candidates

Please see this discussion again. Uncertain situation. --Art-top (talk) 08:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine du square Rapp Paris 7e 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 17:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Villa La Hublotière Le Vésinet 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 15:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pavillon des Ibis Le Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 15:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seine à Puteaux 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 17:29, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ile Saint-Louis Paris 4e 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Small inclination to the left. --Aleks G 22:55, 2 March 2012 (UTC)  Done Thank you Aleks, a new fixed file is uploaded. --Moonik 04:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bougival - L'édifice de la Machine de Dufrayer 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 17:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bougival Berges de Seine 009.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 21:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Quai d'Orléans Paris 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

"sharpening halo"

Bonjour Moonik,

Cette image présente en effet un léger halo blanc tout autour de la statue, et ça se voit... C'est peut-être dû à une tentative de renforcer la netteté de façon un peu trop agressive, à mon avis tu as dû pousser le curseur un peu trop ! Amitiés, --Jebulon (talk) 11:01, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Abreuvoir de Marly-le-Roi 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality, very nice --Taxiarchos228 21:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Louveciennes Belvédère 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud Église Saint-Clodoald 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 05:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud maison 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 20:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grand Lac des Ibis Le Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 11:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bernache du Canada au Vésinet 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Beautiful. --Jkadavoor 07:52, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple protestant Le Vésinet 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good.--ArildV 22:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Musée-promenade de Marly-le-Roi 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 18:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud Église Saint-Clodoald 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Albertus teolog 12:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lac Supérieur, Le Vésinet 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality & very nice. --NorbertNagel 09:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Manoir des Tourneroches à Saint-Cloud 007.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 09:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 006.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good ! A little distortion to be corrected (left edge is leaning), and maybe a FoP problem to check, otherwise deserves the label.--Jebulon 13:07, 18 March 2012 (UTC)  Done Thanks Jebulon. The distortion is fixed now. There are non problem with FoP: the houses in Le Vésinet are built beetwen 1875 and 1910 and the architects are died for a long time. --Moonik 15:20, 18 March 2012 (UTC) OK for QI,...if architect died before 1942...But very good, no doubt.--Jebulon 21:53, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 009.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 06:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 007.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 10:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le cerf du Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me, but the sky lacks vividness or perhaps a bit of vignetting--Lmbuga 22:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le Pecq péniche sur Seine 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, despite minor perspective distortions. - A.Savin 11:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château d'eau au Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 18:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lac de la Station au Vésinet 006.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 19:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bernache du Canada au Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good qualityfor me. --Jkadavoor 05:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Merci !

Merci, chère Moonik, de tes discrets voeux d'anniversaire, je les ai vus, et je suis très touché !--Jebulon (talk) 16:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 012.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 15:39, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le Pecq péniche sur Seine 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support For quality -- JDP90 13:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Versailles Bassin d'Apollon 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 07:56, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Versailles Bassin de Flore 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 07:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lac Inférieur au Vésinet 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 07:39, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parc de Versailles Poney 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Adorable! --Jkadavoor 09:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Pont du Pecq 001.jpg

File:Pont du Pecq 001.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!

-mattbuck (Talk) 12:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lac de Croissy, Le Vésinet 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 06:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Old watermill in Maisons-Laffitte 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 18:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy Easter!

Hi Moonik:

Wish you a wonderful Easter filled with happiness, peace and love!

Regards, Jee Jkadavoor (talk) 07:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Malmaison - Appartement de Joséphine 005.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough for QI, IMO. --Selbymay 20:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Enghien-les-Bains réverbère 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 18:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Re:Dust spot

Thanks. I will review the images. I like your images also--Miguel Bugallo 11:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of Notre-Dame in Chatou 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 09:10, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of Notre-Dame in Chatou 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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.--ArildV 08:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kiosque de l'Empereur Bois de Boulogne Paris 16e 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality for me. --Jkadavoor 09:10, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kiosque de l'Empereur Bois de Boulogne Paris 16e 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 09:52, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chatou Town hall 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. -- Felix Koenig 11:41, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barge at Chatou lock 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Yann 06:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lime tree leaves in spring 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality for me, but perhaps -I'm not sure- it can be cropped--Lmbuga 17:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of Notre-Dame in Chatou 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me--Lmbuga 17:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chatou 5-7 place du Général Charles de Gaulle 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good IMO. --Selbymay 16:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Photos en QI

Tu nous gâtes ! Je trouve que des photos sont de meilleures en meilleures !--Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud Musée des Avelines 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 15:27, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le cerf du Vésinet 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Carschten 13:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chatou dam and lock 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Very nice. --Ralf Roletschek 12:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Tour du Vertbois

Bonjour,

Cette tour ne fait pas partie de l'enceinte de Ph-Auguste! C'est l'enceinte du prieuré de St-Martin des Champs, qui se trouvait bien en dehors du Paris de Ph-A.

J'ai corrigé les catégories.

Cordialement, 84.97.149.81 05:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud 4 rue du Mont Valérien 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. DimiTalen 09:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gare Les Coteaux - Saint-Cloud 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suresnes - Écluse de Suresnes 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 11:31, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 018.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice! DimiTalen 08:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hôpital Foch à Suresnes 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 contrast between architectural styles, QI--Jebulon 15:03, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fontaine de l'Hôtel-de-Ville (nord) Paris 4e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good !--Jebulon 15:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! House in Le Vésinet 011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good.--Jebulon 15:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chatou Town hall 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Something wrong with the (needed, IMO) symmetry, + small dust spots at the right of the vane (not the birds at left !)--Jebulon 15:07, 7 April 2012 (UTC)  Done New corrected file is uploaded. --Moonik 17:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC) Good now.--Jebulon 22:49, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Template syntax

Due to some changes to the Rename template, your recent rename requests are broken.

The new syntax is {{rename|NewName.jpg||reason}}. In case you don't see the difference, it's two pipes between the new name and the reason, instead of one. DS (talk) 14:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barge in Maisons-Laffitte 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Qi to me --Carschten 18:40, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Enghien-les-Bains Villa du Lac 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments maybe also a bit oversharpened, but QI to me though --Carschten 12:59, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suresnes - Écluse de Suresnes 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Iifar 16:58, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud rue Feudon 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Please see annotations.--Jebulon 15:11, 7 April 2012 (UTC)  Done Thanks Jebulon, tilt corrected. --Moonik 15:57, 7 April 2012 (UTC)Good now--Jebulon 13:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suresnes lock 006.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 09:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Church of Notre-Dame in Chatou 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good job!--Moroder 15:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Paris barges on the river Seine 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Very nice --Ralf Roletschek 13:26, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Barge in Maisons-Laffitte 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suresnes lock 005.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Vert-Mont - Parc 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Le Pecq péniche sur Seine 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:17, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Enghien-les-Bains casino 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Suresnes - Écluse de Suresnes 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:25, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Île Seguin 006.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:25, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chatou La maison Fournaise 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 for me. --Jkadavoor 08:34, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Besoin d'aide en polonais !

Bonjour Moonik !

Je viens de proposer cette image. Après recherche, il semble que seule la Wikipedia en langue polonaise propose un article sur ce bonhomme. J'ai donc mis l'image en illustration, mais comme je ne connais rien à la langue polonaise (sauf "tak"!), je n'ai pas pu mettre de légende intéressante, et j'ai peur de m'être trompé. Peux-tu s'il te plaît jeter un coup d'oeil pour vois si je n'ai pas fait d'erreur, et si, peut-être, on peut mettre une légende plus fournie, à partir des éléments de description de l'image ?

Merci d'avance !

Bien à toi,--Jebulon (talk) 09:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Merci Moonik!--Jebulon (talk) 11:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Cloud Jardin des Avelines 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK quality. --Iifar 14:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Église Saint-Eustache Paris 1er 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gare Pont de Sèvres 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, crop? --Moroder 18:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)  Done Thanks Moroder for the comments. A new file is uploaded with tilt fixing and a little crop on the booton. --Moonik 14:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC) Good now --Smial 14:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Maisons-Laffitte 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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}}}

classement

coucou,

Depuis quelques jours je voie beaucoup ton nom dans ma liste de suivi et je tiens à te remercier pour le classement. Je sais que c'est long et rébarbatif. merci a+ --Chatsam (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Locronan chemin du manoir 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice scene. The family adds to it. --Saffron Blaze 10:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Locronan chemin du manoir 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 is a little correction... (the file is updated). --Aleks G 20:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont-Aven rivière Aven 013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 18:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Using one of your pictures in a textbook

I am using your picture of the Hôtel de la Marine (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Hôtel_de_la_Marine.jpg) in a textbook. Please let me know if you would like it to be credited to anything other than 'Wikimedia:Moonik', such as adding a real name, location, URL, whatever. I can also be contacted at thechabon a t hot mail d o t com.

Thanks very much for your work.

Iiiiaaaa (talk) 17:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vitré Maison 13 rue de la Poterie 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 21:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vitré 36 rue Notre-Dame 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --JLPC 20:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Why did you remove category?

This photo was only added so it could show an example of Vernix. You removed it from that category. Why?

Difference between revisions of "File:JazlynRoseVernixByPhilKonstantin.jpg" Latest revision as of 15:14, 7 June 2012 (edit) (undo) Moonik (talk | contribs) m (removed Category:Vernix using HotCat) Line 11: Line 11: http://americanindian.net/Rose/index.html

Philkon (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC) Phil Konstantin

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Malo remparts 006.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 13:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I have modified some of your photos into a "virtual reality" format

You can find 30 of them in the France section here: http://verybigphotos.com/indexF1.html

Four in Morocco here: http://verybigphotos.com/indexM1.html

One in Poland: http://verybigphotos.com/indexOP1.html

One in Italy http://verybigphotos.com/indexI2.html

Just look for "By Moonik - Wiki".

Thanks for making them available,

Philkon (talk) 16:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Phil Konstantin

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Croissy-sur-Seine Maison de Charité 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 16:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Pont-Saint-Pierre

fr:Pont-Saint-Pierre lies in Eure, not Calvados. Kind Regards, --Stanzilla (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jardin de Bagatelle 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Lovely !--Jebulon 15:46, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Bagatelle 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. -- JLPC 19:53, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Alsace is not a departement, but a region

I am really tired of undoing all your edits like this one: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Saint_George_churches_in_Alsace&action=history. Alsace is a region, Bas-Rhin and Haut-Rhin are its departements. Cheers, --Edelseider (talk) 10:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Bagatelle 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me.--Jebulon 08:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jardin de Bagatelle Rosa Pollux 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 16:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Catégories en France

Bonjour Moonik. Merci pour toutes les catégorisations que tu fais. Conventionnellement, un "xxx by department" s'accompagne d'un "xxx by region", de façon symétrique.

Voir par exemple Category:Towers in France.

J'utilise personnellement un copier-coller depuis :

{{Departments of France|prefix=:Category:xxx in|suffix=}}
[[Category:xxx in France by department|yyy]]

{{metacat|department|topic=xxx|topic2=France}}
{{Departments of France|prefix=:Category:xxx in|suffix=|all=1}}
[[Category:Categories of France by department]]
[[Category:xxx in France| Department]]

{{Regions of France|prefix=:Category:xxx in|suffix=}}
[[Category:xxx in France by region|yyy]]

{{metacat|region|topic=xxx|topic2=France}}
{{Regions of France|prefix=:Category:xxx in|suffix=|all=1}}
[[Category:Categories of France by region]]
[[Category:xxx in France| Region]]

D'un autre côté, il faut éviter de trop catégoriser et créer des catégories ne contenant qu'une image. Personnellement je le fais à partir de 3.

Bon courage et bonne continuation. Cordialement, Jack ma (talk) 06:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Churches in Ondres‎;

Salut Moonik,
Je n'avais pas fait attention à ton ajout systématique de Category:Churches in ... par commune des Landes. Du coup, je l'avais supprimé pour Ondres, pensant que c'était une catégorie superflue et surtout unique dans son genre.
Désolé de la suppression : j'ai vu que tu l'as rétablie depuis.

Merci, --Agamitsudo (talk) 11:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

niveaux de categorisation

Bonjour Moonik, je t'ai vu améliorer les categories de mes uploads pour la Vienne. Il y en aura d'autres: une vingtaine de communes et j'attends tes améliorations avec plaisir. Pourtant, il faut éviter de créer trop de niveaux de catégorisation pour les souscategories des communes; évitez notamment des categories intermédiaires vides. --Havang(nl) (talk) 20:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Churches in Les Ormes (Vienne) et souscategory: [[:Category:Église Saint-Martin et Sainte-Marguerite des Ormes‎}]]. Il suffit d'utiliser la "sortkey", clé de tri |Ormes, Les ainsi: Category:Churches in Vienne|Ormes, Les pour la souscategorie, ce qui met la seule église des Ormes avec son nom au bon endroit de O dans la category des églises de la Vienne. --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

(Ajout 1): Les souscatégories de la Category:Monuments historiques in Vienne (churches) forment un exemple comment les clés de tri sont utilisés: cela donne l'ordre alphabetique des communes. (Ajout 2): Il y a parfois la possibilité d'utiliser un clé de tri par defaut {{DEFAULTSORT:}} ce qui serait pour les Ormes {{DEFAULTSORT:Ormes, Les}}. --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Un travail d'encyclopédie n'est jamais terminée, c'est toujours un chantier avec ses imparfections; pas une raison de se décourager. Le système des categories est d'eviter des doublures. Revenons sur la categorie intermédiaire: on parle de l'arborescence de categories puisque on suit les ramifications de l'arbre: une catégory est introduit à une ramification. Cela vaut pour pour Églises qui sont monument historique, une ramification ascendant (pour cele-là on a dès le début tenu au nom complet du monument et créé une bonne systématique.) Une ramification descendante est si dans une catégory une sous-category se forme avec un certain nombre d'items, exemple les vitraux. Une ramification descendante ne se fait que rarement pour juste un item ou deux. Analysons l'exemple [[:Category:Église Saint-Martin et Sainte-Marguerite des Ormes‎}]] et Category:Churches in Les Ormes (Vienne): entre les deux il n'y a ni ramification ascendante, ni ramification descendante, c'est à dire les deux catégories ne sont qu'un (pour l'instant). Il est mieux de les laisser à un (pour l'instant). Oui, les noms de fichiers sont souvent mal choisis, mais parfois on peut les renommer (comme j'ai fait pour le Château des Ormes); il n'est pas souhaitable de résoudre un problème de nommage en faisant de chaque image sa propre catégorie. Une category avec une seule image ne permet pas de survol des images et necessite l'usage du catscan; trop de categories descendantes rendent le catscan moins pratiquable. On vise à combiner une bonne systématique avec le "juste milieu". Tu as la bonne systématique mais tu vas parfois trop en détail. Continue de parfaire les categories de mes uploads. --Havang(nl) (talk) 08:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Churches in Ain by city

Salut,
Finalement j'ai craqué et repris ton organisation pour le département de l'Ain. C'est tout propre, bien rangé, ça sent bon et c'est un peu grâce à toi ! Merci.
--Agamitsudo (talk) 10:10, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for all your work on categories! You are doing a great job. Edelseider (talk) 07:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Categories to reorganise

Hello Moonik, as you know, "Wiki loves Monuments" is coming soon and that means that all the categories related to Monuments historiques in France should be checked and reorganized before it begins. Please, have a look at:

• Category:Monuments historiques in France (chapels)
• Category:Monuments historiques in France (fountains)
• Category:Monuments historiques in France (statues)
• Category:Monuments historiques in France (pipe organs)

As you can see, these categories are partially organized in subcategories "by departement" and partially not. Could you take up the task and categorize everything by departement? You have become a specialist for this kind of noble work. :-) Thanks a lot in advance!--Edelseider (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Dear Moonik, thank you! Great work!

I've just noticed this mammoth, this Leviathan of a category: Category:Monuments historiques in France (hôtels particuliers). It is probably the biggest non-sorted category of them all.

Cheers, --Edelseider (talk) 12:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

link to non-existent files

Hi Moonik, could you please not link to non-existent files like in Category:11th-century architecture in Alpes-Maritimes. An alternative to Image:Flag of Alpes-Maritimes.svg could be . Cheers --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 14:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I dont find the flag for this one. Thanks very much for the file name. --Moonik (talk) 14:30, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

There is also and . Cheers --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 09:51, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 10:08, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

catégorisation des monuments historiques

Bonjour, j'ai vu que tu avais créé beaucoup de catégories du gendre Category:Monuments historiques in Orne (town halls). En fait, ce genre de catégories 'd'intersection' qui mélangent plusieurs critères (type de monument + géoographie) est parfois difficile à gérer. L'expérience montre que les choses ont tendance à se perdre dans des sous-catégories. J'ai proposé d'adopter un nouveau système sur Commons_talk:Projet_Monuments_Historiques_français#Cat.C3.A9gorisation_par_type_et_intersection, qu'en diraist-tu ?--Zolo (talk) 10:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour Zolo, J’avoue que les catégories d'intersections ne sont pas une solution idéale, mais comme ça a déjà existé, je ne me suis pas posée trop de questions et je les ai tous simplement généralisé, pour avoir la même démarche uniforme partout (il n'a pas pire que de découvrir un système de classement diffèrent à chaque fois quand on consulte). Ta proposition me plaît, car d'une part dans chaque département il y a 700 MH en moyenne, donc une liste impossible de consulter s'il n'y a pas d'autre critères de recherche. La classification des MH par type devrait être plus arborescente IMO, aujourd’hui elle est trop plate et une liste des 100 000 églises MH en France n'est pas très consultable non plus. Rien que les cadrans solaires en France, qui sont classé ou inscrit MH, on en a 60. Arborescence par type de MH devrait être adaptée aux volumes qu'elle va contenir et les racines ne devrait pas être trop nombreuses. Si, en plus, le classement des MH par type peux ce rapprocher le plus de celui de la base Mérimée ça sera pas mal. Donc pour l'instant j'arrête à diviser en intersection type/département et je laisse le classement tel quel en attendant la décision? --Moonik (talk) 11:52, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Oui, c'est peut-être le mieux merci. Pour l'instant le système n'est pas encore totalement uniforme. En fait le principal problème c'est que s'il faut changer 20 000 pages à la main, ça va faire beaucoup de travail. Je vais essayer de voir ce qu'un bot pourrait faire. --Zolo (talk) 12:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Églises Saint-Claude par départements

Je ne suis pas du tout d'accord avec la création de catégories et sous-catégories et sous-sous-catégories pour loger en tout et pour tout 1 église et 2 chapelles Saint-Claude, alors qu'il y en a en tout et pour tout 10 et 5 répertoriées sur toute la France. Telle qu'elle était, la catégorie "Saint Claude churches in France" donnait un accès immédiat à tous ces lieux de culte, et permettait de se faire directement une idée de leur nombre et leur localisation. Entreprendre de disperser ce tableau d'ensemble est une très mauvaise idée. Le faire pour des catégories très nombreuses est inévitable. Ici c'est un mauvais service rendu aux personnes désireuses de le consulter. Je crois d'ailleurs ne pas être seul de cet avis, puisque je lis dans un courrier précédent « il faut éviter de trop catégoriser et créer des catégories ne contenant qu'une image ». - Fr.Latreille (talk) 14:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

PS : j'ai parlé de "Saint-Claude" parce que je venais de le découvrir. Évidemment, c'est pareil pour la quasi-totalité des autres saints patrons répertoriés dans la catégorie Churches in Alpes-de-Haute-Provence by patron saint. 55 catégories et 37 fichiers, nommés en clair dans Churches in Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, reclassés en 44 catégories par noms de saints, pas de quoi pavoiser.. Et des dizaines de catégories par saint et par département réduites à 1 ou 2 éléments... - Fr.Latreille (talk) 15:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Merci de m'avoir répondu. Mais plus j'y réfléchis et plus je trouve ce projet irréaliste.

Je ne crois pas que des catégories par département permettent de voir comment les églises sont réparties sur le territoire Français : les départements sont rangés par ordre alphabétique, çà fait 100 catégories les unes derrière les autres, c'est impossible d'en déduire une répartition géographique! À la rigueur une répartition par région pourrait être signifiante : il n'y en a que 20, et çà a du sens de voir que les Saint-Yves, par exemple, sont plus nombreux en Bretagne que dans les autres régions, alors que le Saint-Jean sont plus uniformément répartis.

Mais franchement, compter sur Commons pour obtenir ce genre d'information est une utilisation détournée de ce gisement de photos : le projet, si projet il y a, serait à réaliser sur Wikipédia : des cartes en couleur (blanc=0, gris clair=1, etc.), par exemple, pourraient être intéressantes.

Et puis il y a des ambiguïtés : il existe plusieurs «Saint Jean», une dizaine de «Saint Laurent», etc. Et on ne peut pas mettre dans la même catégorie, par exemple, les églises patronnées par un moine d'Assise du XIIIe siècle et celles d'un évêque savoyard du XVIe-XVIIe, sous le prétexte qu'ils se prénommaient tous deux François! Inversement, il faudrait savoir si «Saint Genis», «Saint Genix», «Saint Geniès», «Saint Geniez» et «Saint Giniez» sont un seul et même saint.

Et en plus il faudrait que les personnes qui envoient des photos d'une église ou d'une chapelle disent à qui elle est dédiée (personnellement j'en ai photographié beaucoup dont j'ignore les partons).

Enfin, un simple calcul : il y a plusieurs centaines de saints répertoriés (sans compter tous les faux saints vénérés localement) ; multiplié par 100 départements, çà nous fait quelques dizaines de milliers de catégories, la plupart vides évidemment. Rien que d'y penser, je trouve le projet inintéressant et vain.

Désolé... - Fr.Latreille (talk) 20:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Commons Barnstar
		In appreciation of all the quality images you've contributed. INeverCry 05:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 003.JPG

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 003.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 has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

ComputerHotline (talk) 10:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 002.JPG

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 002.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 has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

ComputerHotline (talk) 10:57, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 003.JPG

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 003.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!

Sreejith K (talk) 11:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 002.JPG

File:Immeubles, 116bis avenue des Champs-Élysées, Paris 8e 002.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!

Sreejith K (talk) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Vincennes 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 02:55, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Passage des Princes, Paris 3th.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good ;)--Jebulon 14:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Bravo Moonik pour cette promotion méritée, et merci de ton gentil message ! On ne te voyait plus guère dans la page des QI, et je suis content que tu aies trouvé une admiratrice qui a eu la bonne idée de nous proposer cette image. Sois sûr que j'ai été ravi de la distinguer ! Amitiés,--Jebulon (talk) 15:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple de l'Amour de Versailles 005.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 18:22, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Interior of the cloister of Val-de-Grâce in Paris 5th 005.JPG

File:Interior of the cloister of Val-de-Grâce in Paris 5th 005.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!

Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tour Marlborough, Versailles 013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Florstein 16:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ferme du hameau de la Reine 013.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 19:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple de l'Amour de Versailles 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK. --Mattbuck 01:07, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

---

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012! Dear Moonik, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place. 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). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help. 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 in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 23:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Lauréat de Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 en France

Votre photo File:Passage des Princes, Paris 2e.jpg fait partie de la sélection du jury français pour participer au concours international et se classe 3e dans le concours en France. Vous avez gagné un chèque cadeau d'une valeur de 200€ pour acheter du matériel photographique et vous êtes invité à la cérémonie de remise des prix qui aura lieu de 30 novembre 2012 à Paris. Pour plus d’information n’hésitez pas à contacter Wikimédia France par e-mail à l'adresse info@wikimedia.fr.

--PierreSelim (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Toute les photos de Guerlain

Bonjour Moonik.

Je vous suis tellement reconnaissant pour les photos de Guerlain. Ce sont magnifique!--Degueulasse (talk) 11:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

WLM

Bonjour Moonik, et félicitations pour le Prix WLM. Il manque probablement le modèle Mérimée aux File:Musée d'Orsay, Paris 7th 003.JPG et File:Musée d'Orsay, Paris 7th 004.JPG. --Havang(nl) (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Je serai à Paris le 30 novembre. --Havang(nl) (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Maison du billard du hameau de la Reine 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Oversharpened in the trees, but otherwise good. Can you fix this? Mattbuck 21:51, 27 October 2012 (UTC)  Done new file uploaded --Moonik 15:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Could you go back to the old version, and just apply the blur to the trees at the back? The rest was ok but is now a bit unsharp. Mattbuck 01:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)  Done new file uploaded with the guasian bluring applied only on the trees --Moonik 09:54, 3 November 2012 (UTC) Better. Mattbuck 17:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Passage des Princes, Paris 2e.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Clearly a QI to me. - A.Savin 10:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Pour avoir fait partie du jury de WLM France, je voulais te féliciter pour toutes les très belles photos que tu as importées. Bravo et bonne continuation ! Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Musée d'Orsay, Paris 7th 008.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Seems tilted ccw, maybe it can be solved. - A.Savin 09:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)  Done Thank you for revue, tilt is fixed now.--Moonik 10:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Good for QI now. - A.Savin 10:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Presbyteries in France by department

Bonjour,

J'ai vu que tu avais créé la Category:Presbyteries in Loir-et-Cher et presque toutes les autres de ce type. Mais à ma connaissance, un presbytère dans le sens "bâtiment annexe d'une église, où vit le curé", c'est un "rectory" en anglais. Les catégories des MH s'appellent bien Category:Monuments historiques in France by department (rectories). Ne faudrait-il pas renommer toutes les catégories utilisant le faux-ami presbytery (qui veut dire fr:consistoire ou fr:chancel / fr:chœur (architecture)) ? --Edhral 18:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

En fait, l'arborescence de catégories Category:Rectories in France by department existe, donc c'est carrément des redirects qu'il faut faire pour les catégories avec "presbyteries". Qu'en penses-tu ? --Edhral 19:13, 10 November 2012 (UTC) (conflit d'edit avec Havang(nl))

Dictionnaire en-fr: Rectory = presbytère (masculin); cure (féminin). Dictionnaire fr-en: presbytère = rectory, parsonage, vicarage, (R.K.:) presbytery. Il me semble que Rectories est le mot le plus apte pour les categories. --Havang(nl) (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Moonik, j'ai bien vu ta réponse sur ma page, OK, on y va pour le vidage des catégories ! :-) --Edhral 11:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Saint-Jacques Tower, Paris 4th 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Selbymay 16:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Réverbère, Place de la Concorde, Paris 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice one. - A.Savin 20:41, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of Église du Val-de-Grâce 015.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 object of distraction left side for me --Rjcastillo 13:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)  Done I've croped on the both sides and also at the top to balance the overall. Is it better now? --Moonik 15:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)THe foreground is in shadow, but it is a QI anyway.--Jebulon 18:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

ça penche vraiment ?

Bonsoir Moonik, content de te retrouver !

Merci de tes gentils jugement sur mes images en QI.

Je ne vois pas où est le "CCW tilt" que tu mentionnes. J'ai mis une grille sur l'image, tout a l'air droit, le reflet dans l'eau est bien vertical par rapport aux piliers de la tour. Peux-tu me préciser ce que je dois améliorer ?

Merci encore (aussi pour tes photos de Paris, très réussies).--Jebulon (talk) 17:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

...Et félicitations pour ton succès WLM !--Jebulon (talk) 17:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Alors, ça doit être un problème de perspective, et de profondeur. Le tablier n'est pas sur un plan horizontal.--Jebulon (talk) 20:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont des Arts, Paris 1er 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Yes.--Jebulon 14:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont des Arts, Paris 1er 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice autumn mood and light. Maybe less water, and (subsequently) more of the Louvre top ?--Jebulon 14:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bassin du Fer à Cheval, Parc de Saint-Cloud 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. - A.Savin 10:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue of Strasbourg on place de la Concorde 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 07:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cour Napoléon du Palais du Louvre 005.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Lack of clarity, some noise, however, a good composition --The Photographer 13:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue of Strasbourg on place de la Concorde 005.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. - A.Savin 12:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arc de Triomphe du Carrousel 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --JDP90 09:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sainte-Chapelle detail 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK to me. - A.Savin 10:11, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Vincennes 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 17:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue of Lille on place de la Concorde 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice! (Some artifacts (?) on the sky though, otherwise I'd suggest FPC.) - A.Savin 12:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! West facade of Petit Trianon 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. - A.Savin 12:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bassin du Fer à Cheval, Parc de Saint-Cloud 002.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --Iifar 18:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! La Samaritaine, Paris 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --JLPC 18:35, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pantheon of Paris 007.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Jkadavoor 15:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

QI

You voted for File:Moscow 05-2012 Novodevichy 18.jpg to be QI. It seems to me the image is too yellow, thus having wrong colour balance. Am I right or wrong? Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pantheon of Paris 008.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI to me. - A.Savin 11:59, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont Alexandre III, Paris 8th 025.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Nice. --JDP90 18:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pont Neuf, Paris 1er 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very pretty. --King of Hearts 18:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hôtel de Sens 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 21:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathedral Saint Alexandre Nevski in Paris 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Looks good but is IMO a bit tilted Poco a poco 20:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)  Done Tilt fixed. --Moonik 08:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Statue of Lille on place de la Concorde 001.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Statue of Lille on place de la Concorde 001.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:13, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Parc Monceau Paris 8e 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --JLPC 18:15, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gate of Dolmabahçe Palace, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 10:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of Église du Val-de-Grâce 007.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 The sky could be smoother, but nevertheless QI for me. --Iifar 16:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC) It is Dominique-Jean Larrey, and not "Larray". File page corrected. Relevant category added--Jebulon 17:23, 23 November 2012 (UTC)...And maybe the antenna at right could be cloned out... --Jebulon 17:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)  Done I took the liberty to fix this, revert any time, if you are not pleased. --Iifar 18:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Moulin du hameau de la Reine, Versailles 007.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Rzuwig 17:45, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Temple de l'Amour de Versailles 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 20:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Vincennes 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 Looks a bit oversharpened, the sky has some spots and notable noise level. --Iifar 18:13, 22 November 2012 (UTC)  Done New version less oversharpned and noisy was uploaded. Thanks for reviewing. --Moonik 09:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)  Support --Iifar 16:33, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Fontaine Pastorale (vue d'ensemble).jpg

File:Fontaine Pastorale (vue d'ensemble).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!

Bob247 (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Fontaine Pastorale.jpg

File:Fontaine Pastorale.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!

Bob247 (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View from the Fourth Courtyard of Topkapı Palace, Istanbul 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Moroder 22:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Obelisk of Thutmosis III, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me --Rjcastillo 17:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of Sultan Ahmed I Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 tilted ? --Rjcastillo 17:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)  Done Tilt fixed. --Moonik 18:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Good Quality --Rjcastillo 19:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pantheon of Paris 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I would have liked it a bit brighter, but QI anyway. --JLPC 18:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Treasury Gate, Dolmabahçe Palace, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Coyau 18:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Moonik,

merci beaucoup, j'en suis aussi surpris que le pour le prix français mais ça fait tout autant plaisir :) Bravo aussi à toi pour ton travail de grande qualité et tes très belles images! Bonne continuation! --Selbymay (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Gravestones at the Eyüp cemetery, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 11:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Port of Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit noisy, but still good for QI. --A.Savin 11:55, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fourth Courtyard of Topkapı Palace, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 11:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Petit bonjour de la Charente

Quelques mots pour te dire que j'ai été très content de faire ta connaissance et d'échanger quelques mots avec toi, comme avec ceux et celles que je ne connaissais que par photos interposées. Depuis, la vie en QI a repris, dure certains jours, plus joyeuse d'autres : comme en vrai ! En tout cas, tes photos de Turquie et leur soleil font du bien ! Très cordialement. JLPC (talk) 19:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Je suis tombé sur le pixel mort tout à fait par hasard et, sans doute, parce que c'est un problème qui s'est posé à moi récemment. Pour ce qui est du remède, je pense que chaque marque a le sien. En ce qui me concerne il existe une commande qui supprime le problème. Mais mon appareil n'est pas de la même marque que le tien (je ne cite pas de noms pour ne faire aucune pub !) et je ne pourrais te dire ce que tu dois faire. En attendant d'avoir trouvé la parade mécanique ou électronique, le pinceau à cloner peut servir... à condition d'y penser (je suis très étourdi !). Bonne soirée ! JLPC (talk) 16:32, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ships on the Bosphorus, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 16:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of Sultan Ahmed I Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice. --Selbymay 12:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Golden Horn and european side of Istanbul 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Red cast and sky probably needs denoising. Mattbuck 13:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)  Done Red cast and noise fixed. Thanks for review. --Moonik 18:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 12:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bosphorus, Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Blue cast. Mattbuck 13:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)  Done I tried to fixe the blue cast. Is it better? --Moonik 18:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC) Bit of overexposure at the bow, but ok. Mattbuck 12:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Haci Ahmet Bey Yali on Bosphorus, Kanlica, Turkey.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --A.Savin 10:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hippodrome of Constantinople, Turkey 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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.--ArildV 09:23, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 21:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Exterior of Sultan Ahmed I Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Exterior of Sultan Ahmed I Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 14:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château Yoros (Yoros Tepesi), Anadolu Kavağı, Turkey.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Iifar 11:49, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sadrazam Kadri Pasha Yalısı in Kanlıca, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 caption for a good picture. The flags are of the "Galatasaray FC", one of the soccer teams of Istanbul.--Jebulon 16:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yalı in Kanlıca on the Bosphorus, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A slight problem, easy to fix (see note). Maybe not too sharp, but nice colours. --JLPC 17:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View of Topkapı Palace from the Galata Tower, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 some contrast Poco a poco 20:04, 3 December 2012 (UTC)  Done File is improved. --Moonik 07:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC) It looks better but I was rather asking for contrast (especially darker areas a bit darker) Poco a poco 09:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)  Done upladed with more contrast. Is it better? --Moonik 10:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yağlıkçı Hacı Reşit Bey and Prenses Rukiye Yalısı on the Bosphorus, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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.--ArildV 10:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Courtyard of the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not pin-sharp, but very nice !--Jebulon 17:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chamber of the Holy Mantle in Topkapı Palace, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Moroder 16:04, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yalı in Kanlıca on the Bosphorus, Turkey 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Moroder 14:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bosphorus, Anadolu Kavağı, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Kadellar 13:47, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Courtyard of the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice. Needs maybe some crop above for symmetry, and a very slight persp. correction below, but QI. anyway--Jebulon 16:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good and interesting--Jebulon 16:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Yağcı Hacı Şefik Bey Yalısı on the Bosphorus in Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good light. Nice place.--Jebulon 16:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Courtyard of the Süleymaniye Mosque, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 14:08, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Passage des Princes, Paris 2e.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Passage des Princes, Paris 2e.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Exterior of Sultan Ahmed I Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 003.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 16:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Courtyard of the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, despite the slight geometric distortion. I would have cropped more on the top and bottom. Alvesgaspar 14:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Elbiseci Ahmet Bey Yalısı and Esre Umur Yalısı in Kanlıca on the Bosphorus, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Poco a poco 22:17, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Esre Umur Yalısı and Necati Bey Yalısı in Kanlıca on the Bosphorus, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 19:00, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pacific Princess cruiser on the Bosphorus, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 21:16, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ahmet Rasim Paşa Yalısı (A'ija Hotel) on the Bosphorus, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 21:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Baghdad Kiosk at the Topkapı Palace in Istanbul, Turkey 001.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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 --Rjcastillo 12:52, 11 December 2012 (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!

Affected:

• File:Square Jules Ferry Paris 11e - Statue de Grisette 001.JPG

Yours sincerely, Coyau (talk) 18:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Sultanahmet (ship, 2008).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Topkapi withdrawal

Je fais mon petit tour du soir sur la page QI ; c'est pour constater que tu as retiré ta photo de Topkapi parce que tu n'arrivais pas à la modifier selon la demande de Mattbuck. Je viens de faire un essai et il me semble que j'ai réussi à redresser certaines lignes. Deux solutions : a/ je la télécharge et tu pourras la représenter si elle te plaît ; b/ tu me fais parvenir (par wikimail) une adresse mail qui permette les pièces jointes et je te l'envoie en pièce jointe. Tu pourras ensuite l'uploader ou pas si tu la juges présentable. -- Autre solution : tu m'envoies paître parce que j'arrive trop tard. Mais ce serait oublier que l'emblème de la Charente est l'escargot, ou mieux : la cagouille en charentais ! Ce serait aussi oublier que j'ai mis plusieurs semaines avant de constater hier soir, avec l'aide de Moroder, que j'avais photographié la 4e station du Chemin de Croix, et non pas la 6e, comme je le croyais ! --Je te souhaite, à toi et à tes proches, malgré la fin du monde annoncée, un bon week-end et de joyeuses fêtes de fin d'année. --Bien cordialement, JLPC (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Téléchargement :  Done ! À toi de voir si les retouches sont meilleures que ce que tu as obtenu. Ensuite, tu pourras revenir en QI, mais je ne sais pas comment ça se passe : faut-il attendre que le robot ait retiré la première image avant de faire une deuxième candidature ? Peux-tu nominer tout de suite ? -- À voir. J'espère que mes résultats te conviennent. En tout cas, c'était de bon cœur ! -- Bien cordialement. --JLPC (talk) 13:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grand Kiosk of Topkapı Palace in Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Needs sharpening. Mattbuck 14:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)  Done --Moonik 16:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC) Still not sharp, but acceptable. Mattbuck 18:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pacific Princess cruiser on the Bosphorus, Turkey 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments There are some slightly overblown places, but otherwise good quality. --A.Savin 11:05, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Treasury Gate, Dolmabahçe Palace, Istanbul, Turkey 002.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Iftar bower in the Fourth Courtyard of the Topkapı Palace, Istanbul, Turkey 001.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, but probably promotable when fixed. Mattbuck 14:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)  Info The base of kiosk is straigt but the roof of it is realy tilted, not only on the photo. You can see that on the other photos in this category Iftar bower.--Moonik 16:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC) And all the background buildings are leaning at the same angle? Mattbuck 18:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)  Done Thanks a lot, finally I saw and fixed that. --Moonik 09:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC) OK. Mattbuck 18:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Voeux

Merci de ton gentil message. Je te souhaite de bonnes fêtes de fin d'année à toi aussi.--Jebulon (talk) 15:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

post scriptum, tu devrais proposer ton Bois-Préau en VI, c'est l'meilleur dans sa catégorie !--Jebulon (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Je croyais aussi, mais non, il n'était pas candidat. Et puis je trouve le marchand de glaces gênant. C'est une bonne QI, mais la tienne me parait avoir une meilleure lumière. Les personnages ne sont pas gênants, ils donnent une idée de l'échelle.--Jebulon (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

WLM Barnstar

My image got nominated for the international finals of Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, the world's largest photo contest!

Félicitation pour ta finale

D’où te viens se gout immodéré pour la géologie tarnaise? En tout cas il m’a faire revisiter de vielles images que j’ai actualisé grâce à toi. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Château de Malmaison - southwest garden side 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Moroder 10:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rueil-Malmaison Château de Bois-Préau 004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Moroder 10:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mascarons of the Château de Bois-Préau in Rueil-Malmaison, France 003.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, 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. --Moroder 10:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mascarons of the Château de Bois-Préau in Rueil-Malmaison, France 004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 --Moonik 10:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Bonne année 2013 !

Chère Moonik,
Merci de ton message et de tes voeux ! Reçois en retour mes voeux très chaleureux pour une très belle année 2013, pleine de lumière (important pour de bonnes photos ;), de découvertes et de joie. J'espère aussi qu'elle nous donnera l'occasion de nous revoir, pourquoi pas pour une balade photo dans un des beaux parcs ou des châteaux des environs ? A bientôt, --Myrabella (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2012 (UTC) PS : et bravo pour ta VI de Bois-Préau, tout à fait méritée !

Chère Moonik, je profite de ce paragraphe pour te souhaiter à mon tour une très belle année 2013. Continue de nous ravir avec tes superbes photos. Tu m'as encouragé et quelques-unes de mes photos ont été qualifiées QIC, merci. Bonne continuation, à bientôt--Roi.dagobert (talk) 09:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

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

review

 Comment The image is slightly underexposed, it's a shame because it is quality. For the scope it would be useful to add (exterior) because it is not impossible that one day we have images of the inside. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC) Info With more exposure we will lose the filling of soft light at autumn afternoon. I have changed the scope.

•  Comment Please add information to the file description page about the architect (if known), year of construction, etc. Because France has no Freedom of Panorama, this information is absolutely necessary to verify that the work is free. cmadler (talk) 14:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC) Info More details added to the file and to the category information. But as commons is not an encyclopedia, you can see all informations about this castle in the article Château de Bois-Préau on the french wikipedia (it's not yet transleted to english).
•  Support VI for me --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Now support. cmadler (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 07:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

J'avais raison !--Jebulon (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Trop peu d'honneur pour (t)oi suivrait cette victoire :

À vaincre sans péril, on triomphe sans gloire. Corneille, le Cid.