User talk:Rhododendrites
Convenience record for 2024 FP/FV/PC (archived, but retained for a while for ease of reference)
[edit]Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
2.jpg)
2.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
2.jpg)
Shells
[edit]Many thanks. I think, You can send the shells as a parcel. In the customs declaration, it is best to state "scientific material, no commercial value". Greetings --Llez (talk) 15:14, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ok. I'll ping you whenever this happens to get an address, etc. — Rhododendrites talk | 16:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Auroras for beginners
[edit]Ok, here we go. So auroras are about to peak soon due to increased activity in this solar cycle. See [1], [2], [3] &[4]. Last week this one was shot in NY and this one with Perseids was shot in Ohio, even further south than NY. During the big aurora in May, you got these from NY. The first thing you do is to start scouting for a good location. You need a place with an open view to the north, like a hill, park or beach. As you've seen in my photos, you don't need absolute darkness. If you can see stars, then it's fine for aurora too. At southern locations, the auroras can mostly only be seen down by the horizon and up about 1/4 of the sky to the zenith. Try to get something nice in the foreground or to frame it with.
If I lived in NY, I'd probably go somewhere along the north coast of Long Island. According to the light pollution map, it has about the same light as where I live. The Hamptons would be preferable, and this here 40°54′15″N 72°31′41″W / 40.904295°N 72.528166°W would be a perfect location. You get a clear view north over the bay, a gap in the lights between New Haven and New London, and the lights from the mainland shielded by the North Fork. Next up if following the weather forecasts, both normal and space. My go-to page is NOAA. When the charts start to turn yellow-orange, you know something is up. Scroll down to Aurora Forecast and hit play. When the "doughnut" starts to bloat and turn some other color than green as it hits your location, it's time to get moving. Social media are also great. Follow some aurora chasers (there are many in Scotland, Alaska and Minnesota), a lot of these guys will post photos almost immediately when an aurora starts, so this will give you a heads up. Aurora nights often come in pairs, so if you are late to the party the first night, you might get it the next.
Tech stuff: A tripod is a must. Always do manual focus, set it on some small bright spot as far away as possible. Strong auroras can be shot at ISO 800, but usually you'll need to go up to 1600-3200, or further if you have a really good camera. Use a short lens, 18-24 mm, as these things are huge. Use the lowest aperture possible, anything from f/1.2 to f/4.5. Since the aurora can move very quickly at times, don't let the exposure time get too long, try to keep it under 10 sek (ideally 2-6 sek). Auroras behave a bit like smoke, and the shorter the time, the more well-defined you can get the rays and drapes of the aurora. With longer time, you will get a more hazy glow, and also star trails. Last week I was primarily out to get meteors and thus used very long exposure (25-30 sek) and I was just plain lucky the aurora was a bit sluggish that night.
To the naked eye, auroras are paler than you see in photos. The camera will pick up the color better than your eyes, especially for red/pink auroras, since they often drift into the infrared spectrum. When I shot this one, I was so focused on the meteors, I actually didn't notice the aurora until I saw it glowing on the camera screen; it was too close to IR. A good start for you would be to just set up the camera somewhere when you think there might be an aurora (according to forecasts), point it north and see if you catch anything. The camera can pick up things you yourself don't see at first. Faint auroras take some time to learn to pick out, but once you see it, you’re hooked. Do not be afraid to take partial shots of the aurora, they can sometimes make for better compositions than doing the whole thing. Ask follow-up questions if you like, and May the Earth’s Force Field be with you! --Cart (talk) 11:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- So this might be a 'heads up'. When accounts like this [5] start paying attention to increased solar activity, auroras might happen in a few days. We can see the solar activity long before the particles reach Earth and that's what the enthusiasts go for. --Cart (talk) 22:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Belatedly, thanks for all of this! Interesting that you would go east a couple hours to Long Island rather than north a couple hours -- I suppose a couple hours north wouldn't change that much compared to a big open view? I think most likely this is advice I will save for when I'm going to a place that's darker/more open and check the forecsasts then (rather than driving a couple hours from the city on a chance.... unless the chance is really big), but I do hope to use it. — Rhododendrites talk | 11:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- If I had a choice, I would always go to a place with water reflection for auroras, hence my recommendation for Long Island. A beach is also easier for a beginner since it provides an unhindered 180 deg view. On land you always run into obstacles like vegetation when the aurora decides to veer of course. Myself, I'm a bit landlocked now that I don't have a car and the busses stop going at 22:00. Sure, I live close to the fjord, but hiking there alone at night and taking on the local wildlife (moose, wild boar), is not something I like.
- I hope you'll get a chance to do this kind of photography soon. You might want to keep an eye on the sky even from NYC. With the strong auroras now, I've seen a lot of photos taken right in cities, so it's a start. This here is taken right in central Stockholm(!), so it's the equivalent of making a shot from the Brooklyn Bridge Park (even if that photo might be faked). The aurora can be spotted, but very few people think there is even a chance to capture it, so they just Don't Look Up. (pardon the very bad pun) --Cart (talk) 12:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just a heads up. Strong aurora warning today. The beginning of it was seen in mid US last night and it looks like it's building up for another night. [6] I'm praying the clouds outside will go away. --Cart (talk) 14:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Belatedly, thanks for all of this! Interesting that you would go east a couple hours to Long Island rather than north a couple hours -- I suppose a couple hours north wouldn't change that much compared to a big open view? I think most likely this is advice I will save for when I'm going to a place that's darker/more open and check the forecsasts then (rather than driving a couple hours from the city on a chance.... unless the chance is really big), but I do hope to use it. — Rhododendrites talk | 11:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Happy holidays
[edit]Hi Rhododendrites, Not quite yet but this year I would like to plan it ahead of time to avoid the last minute rush. I remember I used one of your images last year. I don't understand anything about art, but I just very much like your images, and am considering using one to embed in my holidays wiki-mailout this year.
Just a heads up. cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Happy holidays!
[edit]
|
Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and successful New Year 2025! |
|
Happy holidays and best wishes!
[edit]
|
Happy holidays
Rhododendrites! Merry christmas! Best wishes for 2025! -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
Happy Holidays 2024/2025!
[edit]
|
✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ |
|
Merry Christmas Hello Rhododendrites, | |
| ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ ✴ |
- Thanks, Aristeas, Giles Laurent, and Radomianin! Happy holidays and happy new year to you? We had a small, quiet family visit over the last two days, and then we're renting a private karaoke room on New Year's Eve with a few friends. Any karaoke recommendations? — Rhododendrites talk | 15:11, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you kindly for your thoughtful wishes. The family gathering on Christmas Eve was wonderful for me as well. A karaoke night sounds like a fantastic idea. Off the top of my head, I can imagine YMCA, Bohemian Rhapsody, or Born to Be Wild being great hits for the group. Wishing you a Happy New Year :) All the best, -- Radomianin (talk) 16:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Tropical kingbird in the rain (60130).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tropical kingbird in the rain (60130).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Great kiskadee (70240).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Great kiskadee (70240).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Your most memorable shot of 2024
[edit]Happy New Year! As always at the beginning of the new year, I'm inviting you to share your most memorable shot of the past year. Which of your photos stood out in 2024? Which image created special memories that you'd like to share with others? On behalf of the Commons Photographers User Group I wish you, your family, and your friends all the best for 2025. Warmly, --Ailura (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Proboscis bats (81721).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Proboscis bats (81721).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit]2.jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Mantled howler monkey and baby (81337)2.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mantled howler monkey and baby (81337)2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
[edit]
|
The Barnstar of Peace | |
| for selfless editing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC) |
tapir
[edit]I've looked for this without success. Lucky you to get such a good pic. IUCN Red List estimates only 3000 in the wild now. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. If I'm being honest, tapirs weren't even really on our radar for things to look for -- we were there for the birds, monkeys, and reptiles, with maybe a chance of a cat. We didn't appreciate just how lucky we were until we saw the reactions of everyone we talked to afterwards. :) — Rhododendrites talk | 17:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit]2.jpg) |
The image File:Duomo Firenze terrace (61451p)2.jpg, that you uploaded is now assessed as one of the finest pictures on Wikimedia Commons, the nomination is available at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Duomo Firenze terrace (61451p)2.jpg. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate, please do so at this nomination page. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Nine-banded armadillo (13594).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Nine-banded armadillo (13594).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Baird's tapir mother with baby (92151).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Baird's tapir mother with baby (92151).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
/FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gray-headed chachalacas (34008).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gray-headed chachalaca (33990).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gray-headed chachalaca (34016).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gray-headed chachalaca (34001).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Blue-gray tanager (33937).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Red-tailed hawk (23114).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Andrew Celli (74956).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Monarch caterpillar (23229).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Juvenile cedar waxwing (23475).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sachem (23610).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
frog
[edit]If things weren't how they are I would oppose the nomination! And get into more trouble. But isn't this picture much better all round and right for the Wikipedia infobox? Also, I don't think it was right to remove the orange-legged variety from enwiki. It would have been better to move to elsewhere in the article and replace this poor image. Sorry. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:38, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- There's FPC on Commons and there's what goes into the Wikipedia article, and I don't see them as related at all. Maybe if enwiki's FPC shut down and it started relying on Commons to pick FPs, I could see it but for now they're disconnected.
- But to reply regarding this FPC and as for what's better overall, I'll say I do prefer the composition of my shot, but more to the point, that picture (in addition to having a watermark at the bottom) is, I think, a captive frog. People with pet frogs (or other exotic pets) frequently talk about where the frog is "from". i.e. in the description, it says "from Nicaragua" rather than "in Nicaragua". But that brings up the question my nom opened with -- what sort of standard do we apply to wild animals when we do have better photos of captive ones? Same is true for the tapirs -- do we want a somewhat dim and rainy photo in the wild or a bright and sunny photo in a zoo? IMO it's a key distrinction between Commons and enwp -- even where it makes sense on enwiki to have the more detailed/brightly lit photo, the "wow factor" of capturing one in the wild means there's still room for an FPC on Commons. Your mileage may vary.
- As for which one goes in the Wikipedia article, that seems like a discussion for en:Talk:Strawberry poison-dart frog. I went ahead and swapped the old infobox photo for the lower quality "blue jeans" photo. I think the one I uploaded is an improvement over the one that was in the infobox, but I also typically say in my edit summaries "if this is controversial, please revert". Sounds like it's controversial, so go ahead and swap them if you want. I'm not in the habit of restoring my own images when they're removed or moved except in unusual circumstances, so you can remove or swap, and I can open a talk page thread to see if there's consensus if I feel strongly. — Rhododendrites talk | 21:05, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- I absolutely agree with your sentiments on wild vs captive. I would have no issue with this FPC on Commons if the other photo is indeed an captive animal. I just assumed it is wild as it was professionally photographed in a very natural rainforest setting by Jack Small, a reputable wildlife photographer. But I'd have liked to take your shot. To me, Wikipedia is a much more important project than Commons, so that's where my comments were primarily directed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:24, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
- Actually I got it all wrong. On checking, there is a frog breeder called Jack Small so You may very well be right. Sorry. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:27, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
- I absolutely agree with your sentiments on wild vs captive. I would have no issue with this FPC on Commons if the other photo is indeed an captive animal. I just assumed it is wild as it was professionally photographed in a very natural rainforest setting by Jack Small, a reputable wildlife photographer. But I'd have liked to take your shot. To me, Wikipedia is a much more important project than Commons, so that's where my comments were primarily directed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:24, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Quality Image Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Brown-headed sloth (23807).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Red-eyed tree frog (13686).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Nine-banded armadillo (13594).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Nine-banded armadillo (13578).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:32, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rufous-tailed jacamar (92364).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
2.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rufous-tailed jacamar (92352)2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rufous-tailed hummingbird (92212).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rufous motmot (92334).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rufous motmot (92315).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
[edit]2.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Mantled howler monkey and baby (81347)2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Mantled howler monkey and baby (81337)2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Green iguana (81503).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Great kiskadee (81871).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Cinnamon-bellied saltator (81899).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rufous motmot (92284).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Baird's tapir mother with baby (92151).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Neotropic cormorant (81362).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Mangrove swallows (81697).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
FP Promotion
[edit].jpg) |
★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★
The image File:Arenal volcano (70785p).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Arenal volcano (70785p).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so. |
|
.jpg){kind=link}