User talk:Rhododendrites/2019a

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:
Rei Kawakubo/Comme des Garçons Art of the In-Between.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support All criteria --Ercé (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:09, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Starling at a birdhouse (92030).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Squirrel in Central Park (10100).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:53, 11 January 2019 (UTC) but too dark --Charlesjsharp 14:36, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tufted titmouse (10092).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:53, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Central Park (10162).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:50, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wood duck in Central Park (40771).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cedar Falls (23410).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! DACA protest Columbus Circle (90598).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:16, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dragon dancers after the NYC Lunar New Year parade (52445).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:16, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Golden eagle at ACES (11824).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:17, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! View from Jefferson Market Library tower (42895).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Horst J. Meuter 12:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade (60278)a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Basile Morin 02:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Starburst sea anemone (12295).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Basile Morin 02:12, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Staten Island Lantern Festival (51937).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Basile Morin 02:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! John Kerry (11108).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 11:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mammillaria bombycina (70458).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:11, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 24 January 2019 (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:
Cornell Tech.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mammillaria winterae (70383).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade (60888).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 25 January 2019 (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:
Mammillaria bombycina.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question - Why is "greenhouse specimen" a relevant scope criterion? It doesn't seem to be a visible one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• @Ikan Kekek: Hmm. My impression is that when a species is not in its native habitat, we add a qualifier (captive/zoo animal, museum specimen, or [greenhouse specimen]). Is there a better way? — Rhododendrites ^talk |  14:12, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• I stand to be corrected, but I don't think captive/zoo animal or greenhouse specimen are valid scope criteria. Museum specimen is different, if it's mounted like the photos of dead butterflies and moths Archaeodontosaurus nominates. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• Looking back through some past VICs, I am perhaps drawing on this one, but there are indeed several others taken in greenhouses that are not labeled that way. I've removed the qualifier for now, as I don't myself have a strong opinion on it. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  16:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• I'm confused. I know that "captive" has not been previously considered a valid scope for animal pictures, but "greenhouse specimen" is? I'd like someone else to please explain. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

• Pinging Archaeodontosaurus for his opinion. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  15:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

 Support There is no difference between the wild form and the cultivated form. The fact of signaling it in the scope does not seem to me indispensable. On the other hand, it is essential in the caption what is done here. The image is of very good quality. What destabilizes me is the choice to make the image from above; it's unusual for a cactus. I took the time to detail this picture and was the best we have for this species, except for the habitus. I would favor voting favorably; but since we started this discussion I think it would be useful to take the advice of {{Llez}} who has already worked on this chapter of botany. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:17, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clerodendrum quadriloculare flower at BBG (50789).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daubeny's water lily at BBG (50824).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 03:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ruscus hypoglossum at BBG (50878).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bee on cornflower in Aspen (91223).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 10:42, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mute swan (20608).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Whitfieldia elongata at BBG (50782).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 19:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Rudbeckia occidentalis on Aspen Mountain (91134).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rudbeckia occidentalis on Aspen Mountain (91134).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Helen Keller circa 1920 - restored.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Helen Keller circa 1920 - restored.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nuthatch in Prospect Park (20267).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 02:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Juvenile black-crowned night heron (22055).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 02:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

WSC2019 meeting

FYI this meeting is planned at the WikiSummit in Berlin at the end of March. All organizers and representatives of national chapters are invited or should take a look at the end at the summary of the event.

This message is left to everyone who was involved in the 2017 edition. Please spread the news to whom might be interested.--Alexmar983 (talk) 16:22, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Santa Cruz (01940).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. Could be a little bit sharper, but OK. --XRay 06:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Surfer in Santa Cruz (01991).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Uoaei1 06:17, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Black-crowned night heron (61502).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:51, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great blue heron (61210).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. -- Ikan Kekek 06:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great blue heron (61246).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. -- Ikan Kekek 06:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2018 is open!

Dear Rhododendrites,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in R1 of the 2018 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2018) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked.

In the final (and current) round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2018.

Round 2 will end 17 March 2019, 23:59:59.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 18:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Whitfieldia elongata at BBG (50736).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:57, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pescadero Marsh (91813).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 02:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Governors Island (72044p).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Seven Pandas 02:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aloe flower (41062).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:59, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anna's hummingbird (41124).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 05:02, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coleus (71579).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Uoaei1 05:00, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Elephant seals at Ano Nuevo (91615).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade (60068).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments No, it's a horrible poorly composed snapshot Tony May 03:54, 14 March 2019 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Ermell 08:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade (61138).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 photo of your subject, and I think the crops are acceptable in the context of a parade. -- Ikan Kekek 07:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wood duck in Central Park (22262).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Trougnouf 01:14, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! American goldfinch in Green-Wood Cemetery (62438).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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.--Fischer.H 09:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sweet gum seed pod in Green-Wood Cemetery (62398).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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, the location is broken. --Trougnouf 01:15, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Snow goose in Central Park (32949).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:39, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Snow goose in Central Park (33138).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:38, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 28 March 2019 (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:
Bonded Vault heist.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Oppose I may change my mind later, but it has greatly changed and someone wouldn't recognize it anymore. It wouldn't make sense without an explanation. --BoothSift 05:22, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support--BoothSift 05:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Boothsift: I don't think I follow your meaning. Are you saying that because the site of the crime looks different now, that it's not the best in scope? As an aside, how does it look different, and how does that affect it? (I really don't know) — Rhododendrites ^talk |  05:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: What I mean is that one can hardly recognize it as the size anymore, however I also get what you're saying, I'll change it to support unless someone else convinces me otherwise.--BoothSift 06:18, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. --BoothSift 04:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Question - Isn't the scope "Gate of Station Fire Memorial Park"? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:57, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

• @Ikan Kekek: I suppose it could be. I figured a broader scope since it's not a big subject and because it's not a big park (it's only a little wider than what's in the frame here). No objection to changing it, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  04:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

• Do you think there are other useful scopes in the park? That would be the key point. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

• Hard to say. So the whole park is the gate, the platform at the other end, seen through the gate here, and three circles on either side, lined with the names of people who died in the night club fire. I've never been quite clear how far to chop up a single subject into different scopes. My sense is that unless there are several obvious landmarks or obvious perspectives, it has, in part, to do with how notable the subject is. In this case, notability isn't huge. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  04:42, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

• Nevertheless, if there's sufficient notability for the park, I think each of those elements would be useful in illustrating, say, an article or post about the park. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

• How about just "entrance"? — Rhododendrites ^talk |  13:47, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Sure. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. BoothSift 04:38, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Hello! thanks for the image, it is very good-looking and has a good angle and color tone, I really love it! also I used it in w:fa:کازپلی. Editor-1 (talk) 11:49, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Editor-1: Thanks for the cupcake! :) Glad to hear the image is useful. I went to New York Comic Con last year specifically to try to take pictures for Commons. My first time at such an event, and I'm hoping to make it again this year. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk |  13:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

So please take some images with similar angle and *background*, that category will be in my radar (watch). Thanks and good luck! -- Editor-1 (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crocuses at BBG (43248).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Eatcha 05:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Daubeny's water-lily at BBG (43428).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Eatcha 05:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Magnolia x veitchii bud at BBG (43311).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Eatcha 05:43, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Magnolia x veitchii bug at BBG (43315).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Daubeny's water lily at BBG (50824).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Daubeny's water lily at BBG (50824).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

FPC opinion

@W.carter and Ikan Kekek: Hello! Feeling a little gunshy after (sticking with the metaphor) a couple recent misfires at FPC. In the past you've both offered valuable advice and I wonder if I could put upon you to share your thoughts regarding whether any of these three images are worth nominating. No worries if not or if you don't have the time or inclination, though. :) Thanks. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  03:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

It's nice to know that I've been helpful. I'll take these in order: Nice photo of Pescadero Marsh, but I might not support it unless the composition grows on me, so I'm not sure how others would react. My guess is that it would get a positive reception, but who knows? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

The magnolia bud is beautiful, though I wish there were more contrast on the right side. I'm not sure I'd vote for it, but I think it's worth nominating. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I think the seed pod is great and should be nominated. I'll definitely support! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: Thanks so much! With such an unequivocal note on the last one, I went ahead and nominated it. I wouldn't have hesitated with that one if it were perfectly centered in front of the background -- guess we'll see if others perceive that as problematic. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  04:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for being late, but I'm in another time zone than you guys. When I see a really good photo, I actually get a physical gut reaction to it before I can start analyze it. The only photo giving me that here is the bud. It is simple and dynamic. The field is lacking a good light or something and the one with the seed pod is a bit too contrived with the distracting building behind it. Just my two cents, --Cart (talk) 08:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@W.carter: You're not late. I'm just impulsive sometimes. :) The light on the field is an example of something that I have a hard time predicting whether it will help or hurt (there's some drama to it, with the left half cloudy and the right half of the reeds in shadow (it was a gap in a rainy day). I can see where the mausoleum in the background would be contrived. Lots of dark branches on one side, mausoleum on the other side... figured I might as well center it, but maybe the choice should've just been an even narrower DOF (or find a different sweet gum tree). Anyway, thanks both for your input. I still never know how things will go, with very rare exception. Think I'll take another break until I have something more certain. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  13:39, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Star magnolia bud at BBG (43375).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- PtrQs 23:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Star magnolia bud at BBG (43333).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great egret in Green-Wood Cemetery (03601).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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 -- PtrQs 23:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Great egret in Green-Wood Cemetery (03570).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red-tailed hawk in Central Park (92541).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Some blue CA at the right side should be removed. --Ermell 13:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC) @Ermell: Ah! Yes I should've seen this. Fixed now. Thanks. Rhododendrites 22:39, 1 April 2019 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:29, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 30 Hudson Yards (92900).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lord Stirling park (63656)p.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Podzemnik 02:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cycas debaoensis at BBG (50863).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Podzemnik 02:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crocuses at BBG (43173).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Podzemnik 02:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rhododendron mucronulatum pink peignoir (70036).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Podzemnik 02:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Snow goose in Central Park (33021).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Podzemnik 02:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Crocuses at BBG (43248).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Crocuses at BBG (43248).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Ta-Daaah! Congrats!! --Cart (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you kindly -- and even categorized! :) — Rhododendrites ^talk |  15:09, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Full service. :) --Cart (talk) 09:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Comme des Garcons at the Met (62473).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Comme des Garcons at the Met (62473).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

The merit is for you! Yann (talk) 06:27, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Yann! — Rhododendrites ^talk |  14:39, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Comme des Garcons at the Met (62473).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Need your presence at Featured sound candidates

		We request the honor of your presence at Featured sound candidates
		Dear Rhododendrites, Featured sound candidates needs your help and you can participate by reviewing or nominating sounds for the FS tag. You can start reviewing/nominating sounds now. Welcome! -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 19:35, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hell Gate Bridge (84462)p.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hell Gate Bridge (84459)p.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 03:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 7 June 2019 (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:
Susan Dennard.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 9 June 2019 (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:
Alice Hoffman.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support unique in scope and adequate quality Ezarateesteban 23:56, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support unique in scope Ezarateesteban 21:58, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support unique in scope Ezarateesteban 22:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:47, 10 June 2019 (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:
Eoin Colfer.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:19, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 11 June 2019 (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:
Susan Isaacs.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:16, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:58, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:14, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:57, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 13 June 2019 (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:
Saeed Jones.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support - Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 14 June 2019 (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:
Jenny Han.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

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

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 18 June 2019 (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:
Ant Timpson.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment - Follow-up from Commons:Valued image candidates/Ant Timpson at Tribeca (64010).jpg. Pinging Ikan Kekek, who commented there. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  20:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Best in Scope, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:02, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 06:09, 20 June 2019 (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:
City Reliquary.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Same reason as Archaeodontosaurus.-- Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 06:02, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:56, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Your imports

Hi, if you upload a file, e.g. File:Horseshoe crab righting itself on Plumb Beach (57349) - edit 2.webm, without adding a license then it will be tagged for a deletion and deleted after 7 days if not fixed. Then you can't come next day and upload it again, again without a license. We won't allow such a file another 7 days in the 'no license since' process. Please make sure that all the files you import here are properly licensed and have everything else in order. If you don't want to do the necessary after care, please don't import files. Jcb (talk) 17:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: I uploaded several files. Video2commons is not conducive to easy adding of information, so they're temporarily without license information until I see they're uploaded and update them. That happens minutes after they're uploaded. Only one time in the past have I forgotten to go back and do so (the original version of this file), and it was deleted after 7 days. So I went back today to reupload. To my surprise, as soon as I see the upload is done the file has been deleted (i.e. before I can add my licensing info). And deleted it with reason "Recreation of content deleted per community consensus (G4)". Where is the community consensus that the file should be deleted? It was not deleted at DR, or due to copyright violation, etc., but due to missing information. That's a 7-day process, not immediate deletion. Please restore. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  17:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

The log tells a different story. I deleted the file 48 minutes after the reupload. That should have been plenty of time to add a license and to fill in the information template. This is indeed a 7-day process, not a 7-day + another 7-day process. Also we don't accept reuploads of deleted content. We have COM:UDR, where they will typically ask you for the relevant source and authorship information before a file is undeleted. Jcb (talk) 21:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jcb: It takes a long time to upload. Had I not been in a meeting when it finished, it would've been done. Alas, 48 minutes. Yes. So are you saying you will not restore it? — Rhododendrites ^talk |  21:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you were not allowed to reupload it in the first place. You can request undeletion of the first upload via the established way, but you will have to provide adequat information, so that the processing admin can determine whether there is a valid free license. Until now you have failed to provide such information, so that it's unknown to us whether the file can legally be hosted at Commons. Jcb (talk) 21:57, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

FV Promotion

This file has been promoted to Featured media! The file File:Wood thrush in Central Park switch sides (16510).webm, which you nominated at Commons:Featured media candidates/File:Wood thrush in Central Park switch sides (16510).webm, has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another file, please do so.

/FVCBot (talk) 09:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade 2019 (27584)a.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Vengolis 01:49, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade 2019 (27732).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Vengolis 01:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade 2019 (27845).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another 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. --Vengolis 01:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade 2019 (27867).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 08:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mermaid Parade 2019 (28030).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 08:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 28 June 2019 (UTC)