Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:
Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.
Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
Bonjour
La tour Eiffel avait une antenne reliée à la station radio.
Bien sûr il faut savoir que des câbles d'antenne sont devant le ciel et les arbres.
Merci des ne pas faire disparaître cette antenne.
Amicalement --F1jmm (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: Hôtel de ville (La Couronne), exterior. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Oppose Because France does not have Freedom of Panorama, it is necessary to know the architect and year of construction to verify that copyright status. cmadler (talk) 15:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment imo this building is at least 120 years old (judging the style), therefor I don't see a problem? Certainly would it be nice to know the name of the architect but ist's not always easy. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 10:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Even though I'm not the nominator (!), I live not far from this building. According to the townhall documents, it was built in 1862 by one of the two Paul Abadie (father and son), who were both architects during the 19th century. The first one died in 1868, and the second one in 1884, so no problem with the merciless No-FOP-in-France. I'll try to know, as soon as possible who's the good one (father or son). -- I think I could be deservedly suspected of FOPing in No-FOP territory, because the building has recently been cleaned and looks whiter than ever. Last point : it's not yet classified among the French patrimonial monuments, which is a pity imo. --JLPC (talk) 16:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: Grande galerie du Château de Maintenon. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: La Hague lighthouse. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Maison en pans de bois (Mondoubleau) exterior. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Église Sainte-Lucie, Niederhergheim, exterior. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Comment In Base Mérimée I find that this was built in 1870 by architect G. Laubser. Is anything else (e.g., birth or death dates) known about this Laubser? It seems possible though unlikely that he lived long enough that this might still be copyrighted, so it would be good to know. cmadler (talk) 14:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: Gatteville lighthouse. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
This category does not appear to replace Category:Images from Gallica, since many images from the BnF have been published in books and can be scanned from these books, but do not appear on the Gallica website, i.e., BnF and Gallica are NOT synonymous. --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: Prison de l'Abbaye. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
This edit removed credit from me for the restoration work.
These restoration works take around 8-12 hours. I do insist on credit, I'm afraid. Please watch you aren't deleting people's credits in future.
Further, I live in the UK, where the necessary amount of work to gain copyright is quite low. You committed copyfraud by changing the licence. Please don't do that.
I'm actually very careful about when I claim. If it's relatively simple, I don't claim anything, and I go through a sliding scale of how forceably I insist on credit. Only the most extensive restoration works gain tags from me. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
File:Happiness.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!
Hi there, I see that you uploaded one of your Flickr photostreams about "Paris, RATP/ station " Croix Rouge " installation " X , l'enfer de la BnF " par L. Ungerer / C-Album nuit du 15 déc. 2007", and bot-assigned all of the images into Category:X. This category is intended to show media pertaining to the Latin letter 'X' or the Cross symbol 'X'. As far as I can tell, perhaps only 1 or 2 of the many photos are relevant to that category. Can you please remove that category from the unrelated images from that photostream? Thanks! Grolltech (talk) 16:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
I am ready to help you, but I don't understand the real meaning of your question. Do you know the website of BNF Gallica ? It is easy: you chose an image, you open it, you use the highest zoom you can, and you download the image, part after part if necessary. ( do not forgot the verification about the Public Domain !)
As for me, I use the "print screen" tool, and after that, I crop out the useless parts of each downloaded image, and I stitch the puzzle very carefully (X1600), pixel by pixel. I use Gimp as software.
I upload the image in "Commons" as it is, and after that, I try to restore it if necessary (With Gimp too). When done, I upload the result over the original image, then the user can get or the original, or the restored picture. It takes a lot of time...
J'ai vue que tu as déplacé certaines des iamges que j'ai chargé de la catégorie Paris à Paris maintenance.
Au début jai cru que cette catégorie contenait les travaux fait à Paris, mais en parcourant les images je m'aperçois que ce n'est pas le cas.
Peux-tu me dire à quoi correspond cette catégorie ?
★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: Porte Dauphine (Paris Metro). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Écluses des Récollets, Paris. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: La Maison Rose, Paris.. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review
Not convinced, there is some perspective distortion, but above all I find the walking person distracting. This other picture in the category is at least at the same level in my opinion. Would somebody else like to comment? Poco220:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For the same reasons as Poco and also the centring is bad, this is a street corner and we can't see the corner and at right we can't see the lights on the wall --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Disagree. The colors of this one are warmer, and we can see the two facades of the building. I find the nominated picture more illustrative. And beware of perspective corrections: houses in this "barrio" are not always perfectly straight...--Jebulon (talk) 07:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: Passerelle des Ardennes, Paris. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Pont de la rue de l'Ourcq, Paris. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
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!
Because of this one [2] and other nominations by you in the last days, let me say that it is usual to nominate just a couple (say, max. 5-6) pictures a day, as COM:QIC hasn't enough of active reviewers and nominating 17 pictures at once may be considered as unwanted flooding. So, I kindly request you to take back a part of the today's nominations. Second, if you nominate pictures not taken by yourself, it is just fair to mention the photographer: for example like that: A girl reading a journal in a newspaper stall, Paris. Photographed by Jorgeroyan which makes sure that the QICbot will notify the photographer (and not you) in case the image has been promoted. Thanks --A.Savin18:35, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Designer Sophie Albou and models, Carrousel du Louvre, 2009.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid.
Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters. See Commons:Questionable Flickr images for a list of known bad Flickr users.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Daguerre 1.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Daguerre 1.jpg]]).
If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.
If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!
Salut, Paris 16 ! Peut-être devrais-tu ajouter "aerial view" au scope de ta photo de Barfleur ? Ça donnerait une chance à quelqu'un d'obtenir une VI avec une vue au niveau du sol... À toi de voir. -- Merci, au passage, du soin que tu mets à t'occuper des photos de Paris ou d'ailleurs. -- Bien cordialement. JLPC (talk) 07:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: Port of Barfleur, Basse-Normandie (aerial view). If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
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!
je n'ai pas bien compris pourquoi tu as supprimé la catégorie "Rue des Jardins-Saint-Paul (Paris)" associée à toutes ces photos. A mon avis, il faut la rétablir. Amicalement, --Mbzt (talk) 16:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Salut Mbzt! Il y a deja des catégories "Enceinte of Philippe-Auguste" et "TEP des jardins de Saint-Paul". Donc Je pense que la catégorie "Rue des Jardins-Saint-Paul (Paris)" n'est pas nécessaire.--Paris 16 (talk) 21:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:UN emblem white.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.
Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.
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!
I noticed the QI template on my 'Eiffel st-jacques horz jms.jpg' image… not the best light (hazy) and not the best conditions (I had 15min to take as many pictures as I could - that particular tower is ~never~ open to visit (and then, only 152 people permitted per day)) - I'm surprised it made it through. Thanks so much for your appreciation, it means a lot to me. ; ) THEPROMENADER10:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
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!
★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: Grave of Osiris, Montmartre Cemetery, Paris.. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Support In criteria of VI there is nothing about colors, saturation or color temperature. So, image is good for me. Clearly, all criteria are met. Halavar (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
car les commentaires que vous avez donnés pour ces nouveaux imports ne me sont pas évidents ni parlant (edited et perspective). Bien cordialement, --Poudou99 (talk) 22:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)(Vous pouvez répondre dans votre PdD, je l'ai en suivi).[reply]
Bonjour Poudou99! La maison à gauche dans cette photo et deux panneau d’ici étaient inclinés et je l'ai corrigé. Vous pouvez télécharger les anciennes versions pour cpmparer. Bien cordialement!--Paris 16 (talk) 05:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour
Merci pour ces explications
Cependant, vous avez noté que ces modifications on entrainé une augmentation significative du "poids" des images (1,89Mo-->2,86Mio et 1,89-->2,86) ce qui veut dire que des pixels artificiels ont été créés. Ma photo initiale était au format RAW, le passage en JPEG avait diminué la qualité de la photo, vos modification ont artificiellement créé des zones qui n'existaient donc pas orginellement.
Je ne nie pas l'intérêt de vos modifications (quoique, pour l'intérêt artistique et encyclopédique, cela n'était pas forcément bien nécessaire), mais ces aberrations dues à l'objectif et à la prise de vue se retrouvent certainement dans des centaines de photos de ce genre. Tenter de redresser les éléments de ces photo me semblerait une tâche herculanesque. Cordialement, --Poudou99 (talk) 09:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
★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: École polytechnique campus, aerial view. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Ceiling of room 76, Pavillon Denon of the Louvre. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Kenzo Building, 3 Place des Victoires, Paris - SW view at dusk. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
★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: Map of Paris by Claes Jansz. Visscher. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Bonjour excusez moi de déranger, je vois que vous êtes un passionné de PARIS, pourriez vous peut être m'aider pour une recherche.
Je recherche les armoiries du Département de Paris, il serait sensiblement différent des armoiries de la Ville de Paris.
Il serait d'or ou d'argent, à un tourteau (en héraldique les besants et les tourteaux constituent une famille riche de noms pour la figuration très rudimentaire d'un disque de petite taille) probablement de gueules chargé d'une nef équipée et habillée d'argent.
★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: Facade of Hôtel Régina, Paris. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Théâtre du Vaudeville, ca. 1853–70. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
★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: Le Paris Trocadéro, Vedettes de Paris. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!
Dear Paris 16,
Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!
In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.
And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!
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!
Bonjour,
J'ai vu que tu avais ajouté des "gallery" pour faciliter l'identification des sous catégories dans le parc de Sceaux et divers batiments du parc, dont le pavillon de Hanovre.
Je me suis permis de la supprimer pour le pavillon de Hanovre, car elle concerne le parc dans son entier et pas le pavillon lui même (que j'ai séparé du palais Berlitz dans wikipédia en français).
Ces "gallery" me semblent très pratiques pour identifier les sous catégories. J'en ai créé plusieurs dont celles de la gare de l'est et de la gare saint-lazare. En m'inspirant d'une gallery que j'avais vu je ne sais plus où. Celle de la tour Eiffel a été de beaucoup agrandie, car il y a de plus en plus de sous-catégories du fait du nombre toujours croissant de photos chargées.
Par contre, j'ai ajouté une "object location" pour localiser le pavillon de Hanovre. Et pour le parc de Sceaux, j'ai ajouté Category:Categories with a gallery for a better choice of sub-categories qui regroupe les category avec ces gallery.
Bonnes contributions, je vois que tu fais du bon boulot en ligne avec le nom de ton pseudo. --Tangopaso (talk) 19:52, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
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!
.jpg)
.jpg)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3A%C3%89mile_Bertrand_-_Jules_Massenet_-_Cendrillon_poster.jpg&diff=91585228&oldid=91584397){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Airport.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(2).jpg){kind=link}
